Duggan v. Commonwealth

913 N.E.2d 849, 455 Mass. 1001, 2009 Mass. LEXIS 649
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedSeptember 25, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 913 N.E.2d 849 (Duggan v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Duggan v. Commonwealth, 913 N.E.2d 849, 455 Mass. 1001, 2009 Mass. LEXIS 649 (Mass. 2009).

Opinion

In 1992, the petitioner pleaded guilty in the Worcester Division of the District Court Department (District Court) to charges of larceny, forgery, and uttering. He was sentenced to five years of probation and ordered to pay $12,600 in restitution. In connection with a separate criminal matter in Federal court, the petitioner was sentenced to a term of incarceration. Following his release from the Federal sentence, he neglected to report to the District Court’s probation office or notify the probation office of his new address. On August 25, 1997, the final day of his probation, the petitioner failed to appear in court, as required. In addition, he failed to pay any of the restitution. The petitioner’s whereabouts became known to the probation office in 2008 or early 2009, when he was arrested on charges similar to those underlying this case. Thereafter, he was served with a notice of probation violation and hearing. He moved in the District Court to dismiss the probation surrender proceeding on the ground that it was not initiated reasonably promptly. See Commonwealth v. Sawicki, 369 Mass. 377, 384-385 (1975). His motion was denied. The petitioner then sought relief unsuccessfully in the county court.

The case is before us pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001). The petitioner has failed to satisfy his burden under that rule of showing the lack of an adequate alternative remedy. “The remedy available through the normal appellate process is adequate.” Epps v. Commonwealth, 419 Mass. 97, 99 (1994). In the event the petitioner is found to have violated the terms of his probation and his probation is revoked or extended, the petitioner may appeal from such orders. See Commonwealth v. Christian, 429 Mass. 1022, 1022-1023 (1999); Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 46 Mass. App. Ct. 921, 921-922 (1999). In any such appeal, he may include a challenge to the denial of his motion to dismiss the probation surrender proceeding. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. MacDonald, 435 Mass. 1005, 1006 (2001); Commonwealth v. Milton, 427 Mass. 18, 20 (1998); Commonwealth v. Collins, 31 Mass. App. Ct. 679, 680-681 (1991).1

Judgment affirmed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law. Matthew A. Pingeton for the petitioner.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Commonwealth v. Al Saud
945 N.E.2d 272 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
913 N.E.2d 849, 455 Mass. 1001, 2009 Mass. LEXIS 649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duggan-v-commonwealth-mass-2009.