Ewing v. Commonwealth
This text of 840 N.E.2d 46 (Ewing v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Shannon Ewing appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. He has filed a memorandum and appendix pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001). We dismiss the appeal as moot.
The issue before us in this appeal is whether the single justice erred or abused her discretion in declining to appoint counsel to assist Ewing with his appeal from an order denying his motion for a new trial in an underlying criminal case.1 See Commonwealth v. Conceicao, 388 Mass. 255, 258-264 (1983) (discussing appointments of counsel for pursuing motions for new trial). The Appeals Court, however, has since affirmed the order denying the motion for a new trial, and we have denied further appellate review.2 Commonwealth v. Ewing, 63 Mass. App. Ct. 1111, S.C., 445 Mass. 1107 (2005). Ewing’s appeal from that order is completed, and his request for appointment [1024]*1024of counsel to assist with the appeal has therefore become moot.
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
840 N.E.2d 46, 445 Mass. 1023, 2005 Mass. LEXIS 768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ewing-v-commonwealth-mass-2005.