Com. v. Sitko
| Decision Date | 31 May 1963 |
| Citation | 190 N.E.2d 902,346 Mass. 765 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. Edward SITKO. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
John F. Driscoll, Asst. Dist. Atty., for the Commonwealth.
James C. Donnelly, Jr., Worcester, for defendant.
Before WILKINS, C. J., and WHITTEMORE, CUTTER, SPIEGEL, and REARDON, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
The defendant pleaded guilty on June 8, 1961, to each of a series of indictments charging him with a variety of crimes, and sentences were imposed. The defendant moved on June 26, 1961, for leave to withdraw his pleas of guilty on the ground that he had new evidence available to substantiate his contention of innocence to all the charges. After hearing, his motion was denied and the defendant excepted to the denial. Under G.L. c. 278, § 29, as amended through St.1957, c. 302, the denial of the motion was discretionary. See Commonwealth v. Wakelin, 230 Mass. 567, 570, 120 N.E. 209; Commonwealth v. Marino, 254 Mass. 533, 535, 150 N.E. 841. There was no abuse of discretion.
Exceptions overruled.
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Brant v. Scafati
-
Com. v. Crowell
...§ 2, be revoked; and that he be allowed to stand trial. The denial of the motion rested in the discretion of the judge. Commonwealth v. Sitko, Mass., 190 N.E.2d 902, 1 and cases cited. Commonwealth v. Abboud, Mass., 193 N.E.2d 264. 2 Although the case is not properly before us in any one of......
- Waltham Resources Corp. v. Kennedy
- Lord v. Registrar of Motor Vehicles