Farley v. Commonwealth

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Farley v. Commonwealth

739 N.E.2d 269, 433 Mass. 1004, 2000 Mass. LEXIS 757

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedDecember 13, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 739 N.E.2d 269 (Farley 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

Farley v. Commonwealth, 739 N.E.2d 269, 433 Mass. 1004, 2000 Mass. LEXIS 757 (Mass. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Diane E. Farley (petitioner) purports to appeal pursuant to SJ.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), from the denial by a single justice of this court of a petition for relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3. The petitioner had sought a modification of the conditions of bail set by a Superior Court judge.

Rule 2:21 (1) requires that the notice of appeal be filed with the clerk of the county court within seven days of the entry of the judgment appealed from, unless the court otherwise orders. The judgment at issue was entered on September 22, 2000, and the notice of appeal was filed on October 2. As a result, we dismiss the appeal.

Nevertheless, if we were to consider the appeal and treat the Superior Court judge’s bail determination as an interlocutory order for purposes of rule 2:21 (1), we would affirm the judgment of the single justice. The provisions of G. L. c. 276, § 58, do not apply to a defendant charged with murder in the first degree. See Abrams v. Commonwealth, 391 Mass. 1019 (1984), citing Commonwealth v. Flaherty, 384 Mass. 802 (1981). As a result, the question of bail for the petitioner is a matter of discretion. Abrams v. Commonwealth, supra at 1019-1020, citing Commonwealth v. Carrion, 370 Mass. 408, 410-411 (1976). The petitioner does not claim any abuse of discretion.

Appeal dismissed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.

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

Diane E. Farley (petitioner) purports to appeal pursuant to SJ.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), from the denial by a single justice of this court of a petition for relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3. The petitioner had sought a modification of the conditions of bail set by a Superior Court judge.

Rule 2:21 (1) requires that the notice of appeal be filed with the clerk of the county court within seven days of the entry of the judgment appealed from, unless the court otherwise orders. The judgment at issue was entered on September 22, 2000, and the notice of appeal was filed on October 2. As a result, we dismiss the appeal.

Nevertheless, if we were to consider the appeal and treat the Superior Court judge’s bail determination as an interlocutory order for purposes of rule 2:21 (1), we would affirm the judgment of the single justice. The provisions of G. L. c. 276, § 58, do not apply to a defendant charged with murder in the first degree. See Abrams v. Commonwealth, 391 Mass. 1019 (1984), citing Commonwealth v. Flaherty, 384 Mass. 802 (1981). As a result, the question of bail for the petitioner is a matter of discretion. Abrams v. Commonwealth, supra at 1019-1020, citing Commonwealth v. Carrion, 370 Mass. 408, 410-411 (1976). The petitioner does not claim any abuse of discretion.

Appeal dismissed.

The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

739 N.E.2d 269, 433 Mass. 1004, 2000 Mass. LEXIS 757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farley-v-commonwealth-mass-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack