Commonwealth v. Hands

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Commonwealth v. Hands

318 N.E.2d 847, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 890, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 833

CourtMassachusetts Appeals Court

DecidedNovember 14, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 318 N.E.2d 847 (Commonwealth v. Hands) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Hands, 318 N.E.2d 847, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 890, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 833 (Mass. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

These two cases are here, following convictions of robbery, on the defendants’ exceptions to the denial of their respective motions to suppress the anticipated (and subsequently admitted) in-court identifications of them by the victim of the robbery. We have carefully reviewed the evidence at the pre-trial hearing held on the motions and concur with the conclusion stated by the judge that "there . . . [was] clear and convincing evidence that an in-Court identification would not be tainted by the so-called cell block identification” (which was suppressed). United States v. Wade, 388 U. S. 218, 240 (1967). Commonwealth v. Leaster, 362 Mass. 407, 415 (1972). Commonwealth v. Murphy, 362 Mass. 542, 547-548 (1972). Commonwealth v. Flaherty, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 282, 285-288 (1973).

Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

These two cases are here, following convictions of robbery, on the defendants’ exceptions to the denial of their respective motions to suppress the anticipated (and subsequently admitted) in-court identifications of them by the victim of the robbery. We have carefully reviewed the evidence at the pre-trial hearing held on the motions and concur with the conclusion stated by the judge that "there . . . [was] clear and convincing evidence that an in-Court identification would not be tainted by the so-called cell block identification” (which was suppressed). United States v. Wade, 388 U. S. 218, 240 (1967). Commonwealth v. Leaster, 362 Mass. 407, 415 (1972). Commonwealth v. Murphy, 362 Mass. 542, 547-548 (1972). Commonwealth v. Flaherty, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 282, 285-288 (1973).

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 N.E.2d 847, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 890, 1974 Mass. App. LEXIS 833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-hands-massappct-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack