History
  • No items yet
midpage
Commonwealth v. Pope
4 Mass. App. Ct. 854
Mass. App. Ct.
1976
Check Treatment

Assuming, without deciding, that it was improper for the District Court judge to allow the prosecutor’s motion to amend the complaint at the close of the evidence, the error was rendered immaterial by the appeal from the District Court judgment to the Superior Court. Commonwealth v. Calhane, 108 Mass. 431, 432 (1871). Commonwealth v. Sheehan, 108 Mass. 432, note (1871). Commonwealth v. Harvey, 111 Mass. 420, 421 (1873). Commonwealth v. Holmes, 119 Mass. 195, 199 (1875). Commonwealth v. Fredericks, 119 Mass. 199, 205 (1875). Commonwealth v. Burke, 121 Mass. 39, 40 (1876). Commonwealth v. Whalen, 147 Mass. 376, 378 (1888). Commonwealth v. Oakes, 151 Mass. 394, 395 (1890). See Commonwealth v. Dunham, 22 Pick. 11, 12 (1839); Mann v. Commonwealth, 359 Mass. 661, 666 (1971). Those cases are still good law. Enbinder v. Commonwealth, 368 Mass. 214, 218 (1975). They control this case. Contrast Whitmarsh v. Commonwealth, 366 Mass. 212, 215-216 (1974), app. dism. 421 U. S. 957 (1975). The defendant’s remaining assignments of error, not having been argued, are not considered.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Commonwealth v. Pope
Court Name: Massachusetts Appeals Court
Date Published: Nov 24, 1976
Citation: 4 Mass. App. Ct. 854
Court Abbreviation: Mass. App. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.