Kimbroughtillery v. Commonwealth
Annotate this CasePetitioner was charged with unarmed robbery and assault and battery. Notices were sent to Petitioner from three different courts alleging that Petitioner had violated the terms of his probation by committing the new offenses. The Boston Municipal Court judge found “no violation of probation” with respect to the new offenses. Petitioner then filed a motion in the New Bedford District Court and the Fall River District Court to hold the Commonwealth bound by the order of the Boston Municipal Court. Petitioner’s motion was denied. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a petition for relief in the county court pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 211, 3, alleging that because the Boston Municipal Court had issued a final judgment deciding that he had not violated the terms of his probation by committing the new offenses, collateral estoppel barred a subsequent probation revocation proceeding in a different county on the new offenses. A single justice reserved and reported the case to the full court. The Supreme Judicial Court allowed the petition for relief, holding that principles of collateral estopped barred the Commonwealth from relitigating the same factual issue of whether Petitioner violated the terms of his probation with respect to the new offenses at subsequent probation revocation proceedings.
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.