Commonwealth v. Lewis
This text of 356 N.E.2d 259 (Commonwealth v. Lewis) 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.
Opinion
There is no question whatsoever as to the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant convictions on both the remaining indictments. None of the other assignments of error is based on an exception (see Commonwealth v. Ferguson, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 796 [1975]), and there is nothing in the record (or in the probation report marked for identification) to suggest that a “ ‘substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice’ (Commonwealth v. Freeman, 352 Mass. 556, 564 [1967]) will result from our following the usual rule of refusing to pass on exceptions not taken (Commonwealth v. Foley, 358 Mass. 233, 236 [1970]; Commonwealth v. Underwood, 358 Mass. 506, 509-510 [1970]).” Commonwealth v. O’Neil, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 768 (1975).
Judgments affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
356 N.E.2d 259, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 844, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-lewis-massappct-1976.