Greene v. Com.
| Decision Date | 11 March 1982 |
| Citation | 432 N.E.2d 706,385 Mass. 1008 |
| Parties | Lloyd Arthur GREENE v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Thomas P. McCusker, Jr., Westwood, for plaintiff.
Robert L. Rossi, Asst. Dist. Atty., for Commonwealth.
Before HENNESSEY, C. J., and WILKINS, LIACOS, NOLAN and LYNCH, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
The petitioner, Lloyd Arthur Greene, was found guilty of murder in the second degree and sentenced to life imprisonment on May 7, 1973. A motion for a new trial was denied by the trial judge on October 29, 1974. The defendant appealed pursuant to G.L. c. 278, §§ 33A-33G. The conviction was affirmed on May 6, 1977, after the plenary appellate review required under G.L. c. 278, § 33E. See Commonwealth v. Greene, 372 Mass. 517, 362 N.E.2d 910 (1977). Greene filed a petition for writ of error with the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk on November 10, 1978; he claimed error in that portion of the judge's instructions to the jury treating the burden of proof on the issue of self-defense. This petition was followed on January 9, 1979, by the filing of a second motion for a new trial in which Greene advanced the same ground as urged in the writ of error. This motion was denied on June 26, 1979, by a judge of the Superior Court, though not the judge who presided at Greene's trial. On December 21, 1979, a single justice of this court heard and denied a motion for leave to appeal the denial of the second motion for a new trial and Greene did not appeal. Greene then reactivated his petition for writ of error, and after hearing, it was dismissed by another single justice of this court on April 2, 1981. It is Greene's appeal from this dismissal which is now before us.
This petition is founded on a conviction of murder in the second degree and, therefore, for reasons which are set forth in Leaster v. Commonwealth, ante, 385 Mass. 547, 432 N.E.2d 708 (1982), decided today, permission of a single justice to appeal is unnecessary. Because the petitioner had an unimpeded avenue of appeal at the time the single justice dismissed his petition for a writ of error, the petitioner had no right to relief by means of a petition for a writ of error. The petition for a writ of error was rightly dismissed. Although it is not timely, petitioner may pursue his appeal in the Appeals Court.
Judgment of dismissal affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Zezima
...the second degree need not seek leave from a single justice to appeal the denial of a motion for a new trial. Greene v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 1008, 1009, 432 N.E.2d 706 (1982). See Leaster v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 547, 549, 432 N.E.2d 708 (1982). This is true even if the defendant was c......
-
Dickerson v. Latessa, 88-1764
...cannot complain of unequal protection. Singularly, on the same day as Leaster, March 11, 1982, the court decided, in Greene v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 1008, 432 N.E.2d 706, that a defendant convicted of murder in the second degree could appeal free of the gatekeeper provision. I say singula......
-
Com. v. Hodge
...justice pursuant to G.L. c. 278, § 33E, was required since Hodge was convicted of second degree murder. See Greene v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 1008, 432 N.E.2d 707 (1982). Compare Leaster v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 547, 432 N.E.2d 708 (1982).4 We dismissed the appeal because the defendant ma......
-
Commonwealth v. Harris
...was not obligated to seek leave to appeal pursuant to the gatekeeper provision of G. L. c. 278, § 33E. See Greene v. Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 1008, 1009, 432 N.E.2d 706 (1982).2 It appears that, due to delays in the Superior Court clerk's office, the defendant was not aware that his motion f......