Commonwealth v. Lewis

356 N.E.2d 259, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 844, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 643
Massachusetts Appeals Court·Decided October 21, 1976·Published·Cited by 3 cases

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

Commonwealth v. Lewis, 356 N.E.2d 259, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 844, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 643 (Mass. Ct. App. 1976).

356 N.E.2d 259 (Commonwealth v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Hannaford
410 N.E.2d 732 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1980)
Commonwealth v. Holland
406 N.E.2d 1322 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1980)
Commonwealth v. Williams
361 N.E.2d 946 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1977)