History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ross v. Commonwealth
420 Mass. 1001
Mass.
1995
Check Treatment

Ross was arrested for violations of G. L. c. 269, §§ 10 (a) and 10 (h) (1992 ed.). During the discovery period, the prosecutor learned that the more serious crime, violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10 (a), was not included in the complaint. The prosecutor sought and obtained a new complaint which charged a violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10 (a). Ross seeks to dismiss the new complaint claiming that the prosecutor cannot obtain a new complaint. There is no merit to and no authority for Ross’s contention that, prior to trial, the prosecutor could not seek a new complaint with a new charge. The cases relied on by Ross are inapposite. Those cases involve amending a grand jury indictment so as to charge a new crime without a return to the grand jury. That principle is inapplicable to complaints. There was no error.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Ross v. Commonwealth
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Apr 18, 1995
Citation: 420 Mass. 1001
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
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.