Commonwealth v. Politano

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Commonwealth v. Politano

346 N.E.2d 140, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 805, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 592

Massachusetts Appeals Court·Decided April 28, 1976·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant appeals from his conviction for illegal distribution of a Class B controlled substance. His substitute bill of exceptions reveals no error in the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment for failure of the Commonwealth to respond to an order to disclose the identity of “an informant” where the trial judge, at a pretrial hearing, found as a fact that the Commonwealth did not know the informant’s identity. Contrast Commonwealth v. Ennis, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 499, 502-503 (1973); Roviaro v. United States, 353 U. S. 53, 56-58 (1957).

Exceptions overruled.

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

The defendant appeals from his conviction for illegal distribution of a Class B controlled substance. His substitute bill of exceptions reveals no error in the denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment for failure of the Commonwealth to respond to an order to disclose the identity of “an informant” where the trial judge, at a pretrial hearing, found as a fact that the Commonwealth did not know the informant’s identity. Contrast Commonwealth v. Ennis, 1 Mass. App. Ct. 499, 502-503 (1973); Roviaro v. United States, 353 U. S. 53, 56-58 (1957).

Exceptions overruled.

Commonwealth v. Politano, 346 N.E.2d 140, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 805, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 592 (Mass. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

346 N.E.2d 140 (Commonwealth v. Politano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related