Commonwealth v. Sowell
590 N.E.2d 1161, 412 Mass. 1009, 1992 Mass. LEXIS 265
Opinion
The sole issue on this appeal is whether a single justice of this court committed reversible error in denying the defendant’s motion for stay of execution of sentence pending appeal of the denial of his motion for a new trial.
Our review is limited to errors of law including abuse of discretion. Commonwealth v. Allen, 378 Mass. 489, 498 (1979). There was no error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Commonwealth v. Sowell, 590 N.E.2d 1161, 412 Mass. 1009, 1992 Mass. LEXIS 265 (Mass. 1992).
590 N.E.2d 1161 (Commonwealth v. Sowell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Anderson
788 N.E.2d 951 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2003)
Rasten v. Commonwealth
786 N.E.2d 335 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2003)
Commonwealth v. Arriaga
781 N.E.2d 1253 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2003)
Rasten v. District Attorney
779 N.E.2d 133 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2002)
Forte v. Commonwealth
676 N.E.2d 447 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1997)