Bindinglaw

MA · rules

Mass. R. Crim. P. 26

Requests for rulings

activein force · 1979-07-01 – presentact-effective-date

Rule 26

Requests for rulings in the trial of a case shall be in writing and shall be presented to the court before the beginning of closing arguments, unless consent of the court is given to present requests later.

History

Reporter's notes Provisions comparable to Rule 26 are found in Fed.R.Crim.P. 23(c) and Rules of Criminal Procedure (U.L.A.) Rule 511(e) (1974). In addition, this rule reflects existing practice under District Court Rule 27 (1972) and Superior Court Rule 70 (1974), which deal with requests for rulings of law in non-jury trials. This rule is intended to secure for the purpose of review a separation of law from fact in cases where the trial judge acts both as factfinder and applier of law. See Caleb Pierce, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 354 Mass. 306 (1968). Although much of the case law concerning requests for rulings has arisen out of the litigation of civil actions, see SUPERIOR COURT RULES, 1974, ANNOTATED 290-96 (Mass.Bar Ed.1975), a rule which provides the court with adequate opportunity to pass upon the soundness of requested rulings is equally appropriate in criminal practice. Commonwealth v. Hassan, 235 Mass. 26, 31 (1920). Requiring the requests to be made before the beginning of closing arguments serves the function of apprising opposing counsel of the law under which the case will be decided. In Wilson v. United States, 250 F.2d 312, 324 (9th Cir.1957), the court recognized that the failure to honor requests for rulings on the law could hinder the administration of justice, since there is no real difference between the giving of improper instructions in a jury trial and the judge in a nonjury trial effectually instructing himself improperly on the law. The failure to present written requests seasonably, however, which results in a trial judge's refusal to allow such requests, vitiates any claim of error in the refusal. Commonwealth v. Lammi, 310 Mass. 159, 164 (1941). It is a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge whether to grant special leave for requests. See Finkelman v. Kaufman, 337 Mass. 770 (1958) (Rescript). It should be noted that under this rule requests are to be made for rulings of law only, and not for findings of fact. Neither this rule nor the prior practice in the Commonwealth requires a judge to honor requests for findings of fact. Stella v. Curtis, 348 Mass. 458, 461 (1965).

Provenance

Source
www.mass.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-17
Edition
2026-09-16
Content hash
ecc7b8333f89974cbbecdca079cf0a61003e4a6c3b20bf37110674ccfafe7b82
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Mass. R. Crim. P. 26 — Requests for rulings · binding.law