Court Opinion

ID: 9743916
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:49:54.687368+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:45.345665
License: Public Domain

Quirico, J.
(concurring in the result). I concur with the result reached in the opinion of the court. In my opinion the result is required by the clear and express language of G. L. c. 276, § 38, which entitles the petitioner to a hearing at the District Court level at which he is entitled to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution and to examine his own witnesses, and to have the assistance of counsel in so doing. I do not believe the statute can be interpreted in any other way, and therefore I do not believe it is necessary to consider whether the statute would violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution if it were interpreted in any other way. I recognize that the discussion of this subject in the court’s opinion is dictum, but I fear that it may be misconstrued as a suggestion of unconstitutionality of historic investigative and accusatory proceedings, such as those before a grand jury, in which the ultimate defendant is not permitted to participate.