Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 8/13/1992

Commonwealth v. Sneed

Citations

597 N.E.2d 1346
413 Mass. 387
1992 Mass. LEXIS 450

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

approving use of “serious injury” language, but rejecting judge’s instruction that malice included intent “to inflict injury”
accepting proposed rule, identical to FED. R. EVID. 803(18), as relevant here, and requiring opponent to \bring to the witness's attention a specific statement in a treatise\
reasoning that a statement properly admitted under the “learned treatise” exception is one “whose authenticity and reliability are shown, which was not written for use in litigation, and which expresses an expert opinion on a subject relevant to the case on trial”
equat-ing “bolstering” with proof of the truth of the matter asserted
defining third prong malice as “in the circumstances known to the defendant, a reasonably prudent person would have known that, according to common experience, there was a plain and strong likelihood that death would follow the contemplated act”
a second degree murder conviction was reversed because an erroneous second prong malice instruction confused the distinction between murder and involuntary manslaughter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Liacos, Wilkins, Abrams, Lynch, Greaney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

59 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.