Genninger v. Commissioner of Correction

645 N.E.2d 697, 419 Mass. 1009, 1995 Mass. LEXIS 681
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided February 6, 1995·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

In a decision pursuant to its Rule 1:28, the Appeals Court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s request for a hearing and investigation to determine who “willfully falsified and altered a copy of the grand jury minutes” in [1010] his file1 and dismissed the plaintiffs complaint against the district attorney for the Norfolk district. See 29 Mass. App. Ct. 1101 (1990). The plaintiff sought further appellate review which was denied. See 408 Mass. 1104 (1990). The plaintiff then sought to raise the same issues and obtain the same relief by filing a civil action in the nature of certiorari, see G. L. c. 249, § 4 (1992 ed.), in the county court2 single justice session. Relief was denied and the plaintiff appeals. There was no error. After review by the Appeals Court and the denial of further appellate review, the plaintiff had no right to further consideration of those issues.

The case was submitted on briefs. Andrew P. Genninger, pro se. Scott Harshbarger, Attorney General, & Nina L. Ross, Assistant Attorney General, for the Commissioner of Correction.

Judgment affirmed.

Footnotes

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

Genninger v. Commissioner of Correction, 645 N.E.2d 697, 419 Mass. 1009, 1995 Mass. LEXIS 681 (Mass. 1995).

645 N.E.2d 697 (Genninger v. Commissioner of Correction) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Picciotto v. Appeals Court
457 Mass. 1002 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2010)
Clark v. Commonwealth
771 N.E.2d 153 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2002)
Picciotto v. Superior Court Department of the Trial Court
763 N.E.2d 53 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2002)