Randolph v. Commonwealth

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Randolph v. Commonwealth

675 N.E.2d 386, 424 Mass. 1003, 1997 Mass. LEXIS 20

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedFebruary 4, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 675 N.E.2d 386 (Randolph 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.

Bluebook

Randolph v. Commonwealth, 675 N.E.2d 386, 424 Mass. 1003, 1997 Mass. LEXIS 20 (Mass. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a purported appeal under S.J.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), from the denial of relief by a single justice of this court under G. L. c. 211, § 3. The petitioner asserts in that request for relief that he has not been successful in the trial court in gaining access to certain exculpatory evidence and materials; requests the holding of a “competency inquiry” concerning the complainant; and, alleges bias in the judiciary concerning the petitioner’s custody status or location. The petitioner has not demonstrated, as is required by rule 2:21 (2), that review on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial court will not adequately protect his interests.

Judgment affirmed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.

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

This is a purported appeal under S.J.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), from the denial of relief by a single justice of this court under G. L. c. 211, § 3. The petitioner asserts in that request for relief that he has not been successful in the trial court in gaining access to certain exculpatory evidence and materials; requests the holding of a “competency inquiry” concerning the complainant; and, alleges bias in the judiciary concerning the petitioner’s custody status or location. The petitioner has not demonstrated, as is required by rule 2:21 (2), that review on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial court will not adequately protect his interests.

Judgment affirmed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

675 N.E.2d 386, 424 Mass. 1003, 1997 Mass. LEXIS 20, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randolph-v-commonwealth-mass-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack