Court Opinion

ID: 9714960
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:50:18.443209+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:30.005150
License: Public Domain

Liacos, J.
(dissenting, with whom Abrams, J., joins). I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in my opinion in Lydon v. Commonwealth, supra at 368. I would remand the case to the single justice who could either rule on the sufficiency of the evidence or permit the judge of the Superior Court to reconsider the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Upon a determination that the evidence at the bench trial was insufficient, the court should allow the motion to dismiss. I need not reach the question whether double jeopardy bars a retrial when the only evidence tending to prove an element *378of the crime was improperly admitted at the first trial. See Greene v. Massey, 437 U.S. 19, 26 n.9 (1978). I add only that if the majority’s opinion in Lydon has any arguable validity whatsoever, the majority opinion here is even less justifiable. This defendant had no option under G. L. c. 278, § 18, as amended through St. 1974, c. 167, but was required to undergo a bench trial prior to obtaining a constitutionally protected right to trial by jury. Supra.