COMMONWEALTH vs. JAMES BALAKIN, JR.
Annotate this CaseCOMMONWEALTH vs. JAMES BALAKIN, JR.
362 Mass. 889
December 29, 1972
The defendant excepts to the denial of his motion for a new trial following his conviction of being an accessory before the fact to confining for the purpose of stealing. He alleges that the prosecution withheld material evidence affecting the credibility of principal witnesses and that their statements made before the grand jury and at trial were inconsistent. The evidence which concerned certain alleged threats does not evince any basic inconsistency. Nor is there a worthy showing that the prosecution withheld such evidence. This is the third time the defendant has been before us on questions raised by him relative to his conviction, and we are not impressed by this latest attempt based as it is on a strained construction of what occurred.
Exceptions overruled.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
