Mass. Juv. Ct. R. 8
Where a delinquency matter has been the subject of a prior Wallace W. hearing that reached a ruling on the merits, if the same delinquency matter serves as the basis of a subsequent Wallace W. hearing, a judge is not compelled to revisit the previous ruling and hold a new Wallace W. hearing unless the judge finds that to revisit it would be in the interest of substantial justice.
Mass. Juv. Ct. R. 8
Note
This language is similar to Rule 13 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure which allows a judge to revisit previously ruled on pre-trial motions. Subdivision (a)(5) of the Rule provides that although a motion has been heard and denied, it may be renewed if "substantial justice requires" that action. This is appropriate where new or additional grounds are alleged which could not reasonably have been known when the motion was originally filed. Similarly, if counsel can show that new evidence or grounds exist that could not have been reasonably known at the time of the earlier Wallace W. hearing, a judge may decide to revisit the prior ruling in the interests of justice.