DOCSLIB.ORG

In the Matter of the Boston Municipal Court, Department of the Trial

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In the Matter of the Boston Municipal Court, Department of the Trial 7 v CLERK'S COPY COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUFFOLK, SS. SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT NO. SJC-OE-085 IN THE MATTER OF THE BOSTON MUNICIPAL COURT ;s DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT Report of Special Master and Commissioner Dean Paul R. Sugarman Suffolk University Law School 41 Temple Street Boston, MA 02114 February 4, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS I . INTRODUCTION 1 1. Order Appointing Special Master and Commissioner 1 2. The Boston Globe Series 1 3. Methodology of Investigation 3 II. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE, STRUCTURE, ORGANIZATION AND PRESENT OPERATION OF BMC 12 1. Brief History of the Boston Municipal Court and the District Courts 12 2. Efforts to Reorganize the Courts 18 3. The Court Reorganization Act of 1978 21 4. The Trial De Novo System 24 a. Criminal Jurisdiction of the District Courts and BMC 24 b. Trial De Novo Prior to 1979 25 c. Trial De Novo Changes of 1979 26 d. The Debate over Abolition of De Novo 28 5. Budget and Physical Facilities of BMC 30 6. Case Load of BMC 33 7. Administrative Structure of BMC 36 8. BMC Probation Department 37 9. Operation of BMC Primary Court for Criminal Business 3 9 10. Operation of BMC Jury-of-Six Session 3 9 11. Assignment of Judges, Clerks, and Cases to Sessions 51 a. Assignment of Cases 51 b. Assignment of Clerks to Sessions 55 c. Assignment of Cases 56 12. Conferencing of Cases 57 13. "Admission to Sufficient Facts" and "Continuance Without A Finding" 60 14. Suffolk County District Attorney's Office 62 15. "Operating Under the Influence" Cases 68 16. Tape Recording of Proceedings 75 a. History of Rules for Tape Recording of Proceedings 76 b. Current BMC Rules for Taping 79 c. Purpose of Tape Recordings 82 d. Taping Procedures and Equipment in the BMC 85 III. STATISTICAL STUDY 93 1. Introduction 93 2. The Globe Statistics 94 3. Methodology Used in this Report 99 4. Analysis of Dispositions for Individual Lawyers and Judges 100 IV. BMC JUDGES OBJECT OF MEDIA ATTENTION 114 1. Chief Justice William J. Tierney 114 2. Judge Walter Hurley 119 3. Judge John A. Pino 126 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENT When this task began, the only certainties were that it would consume a large block of time over a relatively brief period, and that it would involve the acguiring and sifting through huge volumes of information. Having in mind that the Order of the Supreme Judicial Court was not accompanied by a staff or a set of printed instructions on where, or how, to find such a staff, the job ahead appeared more formidable than one would care to imagine. This problem was soon solved by the presence of two people who made the endeavor possible. The first, W. Thomas Smith, Esq. , my former law partner, a capable and experienced trial lawyer's trial lawyer who is not only highly intelligent and efficient, but when the pressures mount, unflappable. The second, Professor Marc G. Perlin of Suffolk University Law School who, in addition to his brilliance, and abilities as a teacher, is an accomplished scholar, author and researcher. Both Mr. Smith and Professor Perlin possess the insight, eye for detail, dedication and practical approach to problems that was required. Without the efforts of Mr. Smith and Professor Perlin throughout the course of this study, the job could not have been done. They have my utmost respect and gratitude. PAUL R. SUGARMAN INTRODUCTION 1 . Order Appointing Special Master and Commissioner On October 3, 1990, the Supreme Judicial Court entered an Order (Appendix A) appointing a "Special Master and Commissioner to conduct a prompt and thorough administrative inquiry into alleged improprieties with respect to preferential treatment of attorneys by certain justices of the Boston Municipal Court." The Special Master and Commissioner was also ordered to file a report with his findings, conclusions and recommendations, and also to "...make such recommendations as he may deem appropriate to the [Court] with respect to indications or findings of misconduct, if any, on the part of any justice, officer or employee of the Boston Municipal Court." The Special Master and Commissioner was given the power to subpoena witnesses and to administer oaths. This report is submitted pursuant to the Order of the Court. 2 . The Boston Globe Series Although not referred to in the Order, the action of the Court followed a series of five articles in the Boston Globe published on September 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27, 1990. (Articles appear as Appendix B.) The series prompted much media comment and attracted wide public attention. Four of the articles (September 23, 24, 25 and 26, 1990) referred to certain perceived practices at the Boston Municipal Court Department (hereafter "BMC"). Two of those articles (September 25 and 26, 1990) dealt 2 with those issues in depth. More specifically, the articles covered the so-called " jury-of-six sessions" at the BMC. In substance, they set out data purporting to establish that six attorneys described as "politically-connected" appeared frequently before three justices of the BMC (in cases over a five-year sample period, 1985-1989) and that the results achieved by those six attorneys before those three justices were better, by a substantial margin than those of other attorneys generally. The series put some emphasis on a numerical compilation of cases purporting to show a relationship between the six attorneys and the three judges in terms of better results. The three BMC judges named were Chief Justice William J. Tierney, Associate Justice John A. Pino and Associate Justice Walter Hurley. Of the six attorneys named, one was a member of the State Senate (Michael LoPresti, Jr.). Three were members of the Massachusetts House of Representatives during the period covered by the Globe series (Michael F. Flaherty, Alfred E. Saggese, Jr. and Salvatore F. DiMasi) , one a former Plymouth County District Attorney (Thomas E. Finnerty) , and a former member of the Massachusetts Senate, House of Representatives and presently Associate Counsel to the Senate (George V. Kenneally, Jr.). Although there are some references to other judges and other attorneys, the emphasis was on the three judges and six attorneys referred to above. The articles also set out certain anecdotal descriptions of and comments concerning specific cases which, according to the 3 series, tended, along with the other data, to establish preferential treatment. Although the Globe series covered several matters involving the BMC and other courts, the Order of the Supreme Judicial Court appointing the Special Master and Commissioner referred to an "administrative inquiry into alleged improprieties with respect to preferential treatment of attorneys by certain justices of the Boston Municipal Court." Every effort was made to stay within the confines of the subject matter of the Order. For example, other matters reported by the Globe , including matters in other courts, work habits or bail fees, were not investigated. Indications or findings of misconduct that may have been uncovered during the course of the inquiry are, in accordance with the Order, reported. Although the Globe series contained allegations prompting inquiry, this investigation was conducted independently with its own methodology. 3 . Methodology of Investigation This administrative inquiry began, using the Globe series of articles as a starting point. The reason was that the articles themselves contained specific allegations which needed investigation, and the articles raised other questions concerning the conduct of the BMC and certain of its personnel which 4 required answers. At first the inquiry concentrated on the three judges and six attorneys specifically named in the Globe articles. However, as will be set forth below, as the inquiry proceeded, a thorough review of all BMC judicial and many non- judicial personnel was conducted. Further, the inquiry focused almost exclusively on the BMC's criminal jury-of-six sessions. The Globe allegations were focused on these sessions, and as the inquiry proceeded, it became apparent for several reasons discussed in this report, that to the extent problems of the type this inquiry was commissioned to address existed, they would be most apparent in the jury sessions. Also, the inquiry did not consider matters arising from cases entered before 1985. The BMC tape library did not contain recordings of proceedings predating 1986 making investigation of such matters more difficult. 1 Also, the judicial personnel in the BMC were significantly different before 1985, making an inquiry into conduct before then less relevant to the present operation of the court. In addition the Globe generally used the period from 1985 to 1989 for its articles. Finally, some practical limitation in scope had to be considered. The inquiry began with an attempt to understand the general operation of the BMC and, in particular, the jury sessions. A thorough review of the entire process was conducted. Each of the 1 As discussed later in Section II. 16, the tapes had been erased in accordance with the applicable BMC rule. ; specific cases mentioned in the Globe series where there was an allegation which was considered subject to this inquiry was reviewed and investigated. Then, as other matters were brought to the Special Master's attention, through testimony, interview, or review of dockets or tapes, these were followed up with a thorough investigation. The techniques that were used during the course of the inquiry were: 1. Testimony under oath stenographically transcribed; 2 . Informal interviews 3. Examination of BMC docket sheets, case files and probation records of specific cases; 4. Examination of district attorneys' files and police records for specific cases; 5. Review of original BMC court tapes; 6. Review of BMC files, internal memoranda and regularly generated reports and statistics; 7. Statistical survey of BMC criminal cases with models and analysis generated with the assistance of a consultant; 8.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "First, Do No Harm.” March 28, 2007
    "First, do no harm.” March 28, 2007 Table of Contents Executive Summary & Recommendations ................................................................................................5 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................11 1. Protecting Children and Family Preservation .............................................................................15 2. 51A Reports and Mandated reporters ........................................................................................20 3. DSS Investigations.....................................................................................................................25 4. DSS Staffing...............................................................................................................................27 5. DSS Records Management........................................................................................................34 6. DSS Critiques.............................................................................................................................37 7. Law Enforcement Involvement...................................................................................................39 8. Private Providers........................................................................................................................40 9. Risk Assessment........................................................................................................................43
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook of Civil Procedure in the Massachusetts District Court
    HANDBOOK OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN THE MASSACHUSETTS DISTRICT COURT SPECIAL ALERT New Requirements in Civil Actions in the District Court, the Boston Municipal Court, and the Superior Court Effective March 1, 2008 We are pleased to provide you with the following summary of important new requirements affecting every civil action in the 62 courts constituting the Massachusetts District Court and the eight courts constituting the Boston Municipal Court. One of the new requirements also affects money damage actions in the Superior Court. This summary has been prepared by Marc G. Perlin and John M. Connors, co-authors of the Handbook of Civil Procedure in the Massachusetts District Court, Third Edition. These requirements result from recent caselaw from the Supreme Judicial Court and a series of amendments to the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, effective March 1, 2008. The rule changes apply to all “actions commenced on or after March 1, 2008, and, with respect to pending actions commenced on or after August 31, 2004 [the date that the statewide one-trial system became effective in Massachusetts], the amendments are applicable to procedural steps occurring on or after March 1, 2008” (Order of the Supreme Judicial Court dated November 28, 2007). The full text of the rule changes and the accompanying Reporter’s Notes are included with this Special Alert. A complete analysis of these changes, as well as all of the many other fundamental changes of the past five years, will be provided in the new edition of the Handbook that will be available later this year. 1. Clarification of the $25,000 “Procedural Amount” Requirement for Money Damage Actions in the District Court, the Boston Municipal Court, and the Superior Court.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice Reinvestment in Massachusetts Overview
    Justice Reinvestment in Massachusetts Overview JANUARY 2016 Background uring the summer of 2015, Massachusetts state leaders STEERING COMMITTEE Drequested support from the U.S. Department of Justice’s Charlie Baker, Governor, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) and The Pew Charitable Robert DeLeo, House Speaker, Massachusetts House of Representatives Trusts (Pew) to use a “justice reinvestment” approach to develop Ralph Gants, Chief Justice, Supreme Judicial Court Karyn Polito, Lieutenant Governor, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts a data-driven policy framework to reduce corrections spending Stan Rosenberg, Senate President, Massachusetts Senate and reinvest savings in strategies that can reduce recidivism and improve public safety. As public-private partners in the Justice WORKING GROUP Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), BJA and Pew approved the state’s Co-Chairs request and asked The Council of State Governments (CSG) Justice William Brownsberger, State Senator, Second Suffolk and Center to provide intensive technical assistance to help collect and Middlesex District Paula Carey, Chief Justice, Massachusetts Trial Court analyze data and develop appropriate policy options for the state. John Fernandes, State Representative, Tenth Worcester District Lon Povich, Chief Legal Counsel, Office of the Governor State leaders established the CSG Justice Center-Massachusetts Criminal Justice Review, a project led by a bipartisan, interbranch Members James G. Hicks, Chief, Natick Police steering committee and working group to support the justice Anthony Benedetti, Chief Counsel, Committee for Public reinvestment approach. The five-member steering committee is Counsel Services composed of Governor Charlie Baker, Lieutenant Governor Karyn Daniel Bennett, Secretary, Executive Office of Public Safety and Polito, Chief Justice Ralph Gants, Senate President Stan Rosenberg, Security (EOPSS) and House Speaker Robert DeLeo.
    [Show full text]
  • The Governor's Budget Recommendation Is Also Available On-Line At
    Commonwealth of Massachusetts THE GOVERNOR’S BUDGET RECOMMENDATION Charles D. Baker, Governor Karyn E. Polito, Lieutenant Governor Fiscal Year 2021 House 2 January 22, 2020 www.mass.gov/budget/governor Executive Office for Administration and Finance Michael J Heffernan, Secretary Catharine M Hornby, Undersecretary and Budget Director Melissa Andrade Christina Lento Neil Montague William Archibald Jerry Lhérisson Viji Patil Mark Attia Emmy Li Cassandra Roeder Azra Beels Andrew Lyczmanenko Larry Segel Gary Blank Patrick Lynch Adam Schaffer John Caljouw Giovanni Maffeo Daniel Shark Sophia Capone Noah R Martin Jr. Bran Shim John DeFelice Diane Martinos John Stephan Kelsey Goetz Patrick Marvin Jennifer Sullivan Sandy Gomes Olivia McCaffrey Brendan Sweeney Olivia Graham Christine McCarthy Danny Tam James Harvey Lindsey McCauley Valerie Valliant Caroline Higley William McNamara Gina Vitale Maya Jonas-Silver Rick Mikulis Emily J Williams Bob Monaco The Governor’s Budget Recommendation is available on-line at: www.mass.gov/budget/governor Telephone: 617-727-2040 User Guide to Governor's Budget Recommendation Information available on the Web: The Governor's Budget Recommendation is also available on-line at http://www.mass.gov/budget/governor The on-line budget information includes Legislative Line-Items with links to: Three prior years of budgeted GAA amounts, current fiscal year projected spending, and FY21 Budgetary Recommendations. Actual spending for three prior years, projected current year spending, and the FY21 Budgetary Recommendations by spending categories. The state workforce funded from budgetary appropriations for June of the preceding three fiscal years, approved levels for the current fiscal year, and the projected level for FY21. The Financial Statements section contains detailed charts with actual and projected revenues and spending for the previous, current, and upcoming fiscal years, broken out by different funds for all of the budgetary items.
    [Show full text]
  • The Casino Debate in Massachusetts
    University of Massachusetts Boston ScholarWorks at UMass Boston Financial Services Forum Publications Financial Services Forum 4-1-2011 Dice or No Dice: The aC sino Debate in Massachusetts College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.umb.edu/financialforum_pubs Part of the Economics Commons, Gaming and Casino Operations Management Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation College of Management, University of Massachusetts Boston, "Dice or No Dice: The asinoC Debate in Massachusetts" (2011). Financial Services Forum Publications. Paper 28. http://scholarworks.umb.edu/financialforum_pubs/28 This Research Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Financial Services Forum at ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. It has been accepted for inclusion in Financial Services Forum Publications by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at UMass Boston. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Spring 2011 Report Dice or No Dice: The Casino Debate in Massachusetts Dice or No Dice: The Casino Debate in Massachusetts University of Massachusetts Boston, College of Management Financial Services Forum Spring 2011 Report [1] Spring 2011 Report Dice or No Dice: The Casino Debate in Massachusetts Welcome to the UMASS – Boston, College of Management, Financial Services Forum’s 2011 Report on the casino debate in Massachusetts. The debate on casinos has intensified over the last few years. Governor Deval Patrick tried to get approval for three casinos back in September 2008, which was rejected by the then Speaker Salvatore Dimasi. However, two years ago, the Governor stood in the way of casinos by vetoing the bill passed by the House and the Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:20-Cv-10767-RGS Document 2 Filed 04/20/20 Page 1 of 32
    Case 1:20-cv-10767-RGS Document 2 Filed 04/20/20 Page 1 of 32 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ACA INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 20-10767 v. MAURA HEALEY, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS MASSACHUSETTS ATTORNEY GENERAL Defendant. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF Plaintiff ACA International, the Association of Credit and Collection Professionals, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (“ACA”), for its Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief against Defendant Maura Healey in her official capacity as Massachusetts Attorney General, alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. ACA is a Minnesota nonprofit corporation with offices in Washington, D.C., and Minneapolis, Minnesota. Founded in 1939, ACA represents more than 2,300 members, including third-party collection agencies, law firms, creditors, asset-buying or debt-buying companies, and vendor affiliates. ACA provides a wide variety of products, services, and publications, including educational and compliance-related information; and articulates the value of the credit-and-collection industry to businesses, policymakers, and consumers. ACA’s primary purpose is to promote and maintain the highest standards of professionalism in the credit-and-collection industry. To that end, ACA represents its members’ interests in the legislative and regulatory processes and addresses regulatory issues that are critical to members’ success. Case 1:20-cv-10767-RGS Document 2 Filed 04/20/20 Page 2 of 32 2. ACA’s membership includes members located in Massachusetts who own and/or collect debt in Massachusetts—including at least one law firm—as well as other attorney members located in Massachusetts. ACA’s membership also includes members located outside of Massachusetts who own and/or collect debt in Massachusetts.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT GREENEVILLE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) ) v. ) No. 2:15-CR-101 ) THOMAS LEE NEWMAN, SR., ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER The defendant, Thomas Lee Newman, Sr., was convicted of four drug trafficking offenses after a bench trial before the undersigned. After the Court rendered its verdict, a sentencing hearing was scheduled and a presentence investigation report (“PSR”) was ordered. The PSR, disclosed to the parties on October 27, 2016, has been objected to by the defendant. The Court received evidence and heard argument on the objections on February 1, 2017. The government has filed a supplemental brief, [Doc. 103].1 This memorandum opinion and order will address defendant’s objections to the PSR. On September 9, 2015, a federal grand jury returned a four-count indictment charging the defendant, Thomas Lee Newman, Sr., a/k/a “Tree” in Count One with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base (“crack”), in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 841(b)(1)(A) (Count One), possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) (Counts Two and Four), and distribution of crack cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) (Count Three). On September 15, 2015, the United States filed an information to establish a prior conviction 1 The parties were given a deadline of February 13, 2017, to file a supplemental memorandum.
    [Show full text]
  • Read EEA's Press Statement on the Bill Being
    For Immediate Release Contact: Tom Weber (617) 330-7389 (Work) July 31, 2008 (617) 669-3678 (Cell) [email protected] EARLY EDUCATION ADVOCATES PRAISE LANDMARK BILL “An Act Relative to Early Education and Care” Signed into Law at State House Ceremony BOSTON – The Early Education for All (EEA) Campaign today praised the Massachusetts Legislature and Governor Deval Patrick as he signed An Act Relative to Early Education and Care into law at a State House ceremony. The landmark legislation, sponsored by Education Committee Co-Chairs Senator Robert Antonioni and Representative Patricia Haddad, was passed unanimously by both the House and Senate and formally establishes the Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK) Program in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The legislation codifies in state law, and helps shape future directions for, a range of programs the Department of Early Education and Care (EEC) has been developing and implementing over the last three years. Specifically, it directs EEC to create strategic recommendations for the UPK Program and to develop a state policy on kindergarten transition. Furthermore, the bill creates a state advisory council on early education that will work to establish formal quality and performance standards to allow for continuous program improvement. It directs EEC to plan for and address the unique needs of families with infants and toddlers. It also further delineates powers and duties of the Board, Department, and Commissioner of EEC and makes technical changes necessary for the effective development of a coordinated and streamlined early education and care system. “This bill represents a major step forward for young children and families, further solidifying the Commonwealth’s commitment to providing universal access to high- quality early education and affirming Massachusetts’ standing as a leader in this important area,” said EEA Campaign Director Amy O’Leary.
    [Show full text]
  • Governor Baker Nominates Catherine H. Ham of Brookline As Associate Justice of the Boston Municipal Court
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by State Library of Massachusetts Electronic Repository FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 26, 2019 CONTACT Brendan Moss [email protected] Governor Baker Nominates Catherine H. Ham of Brookline as Associate Justice of the Boston Municipal Court BOSTON – Today, Governor Charlie Baker nominated Catherine H. Ham of Brookline to the position of Associate Justice of the Boston Municipal Court. Attorney Ham has 15 years of legal experience in the public sector. “Attorney Ham has extensive experience in the Plymouth County and Suffolk County District Attorney’s Offices that makes her well qualified for a position in the Boston Municipal Court,” said Governor Charlie Baker. “I am pleased to submit her name to Governor’s Council for their advice and consent.” “Attorney Ham’s career protecting the Commonwealth’s most vulnerable makes her a great addition to this busy Court,” said Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito. “I am confident that, if confirmed, she will serve the bench well.” The Boston Municipal Court Department has thirty judges serving the City of Boston in eight court divisions located in Brighton, Central (downtown), Charlestown, Dorchester, East Boston, Roxbury, South Boston and West Roxbury. Judicial nominations are subject to the advice and consent of the Governor’s Council. Applicants for judicial openings are reviewed by the Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) and recommended to the governor. Governor Baker established the JNC in February 2015 pursuant to Executive Order 558, a non-partisan, non-political Commission composed of volunteers from a cross-section of the Commonwealth's diverse population to screen judicial applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Gazette
    VOL. 120 - NO. 50 BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, DECEMBER 9, 2016 $.35 A COPY Mayor Signs Cable Television License, Mayor’s Enchanted Trolley Tour Bringing Verizon Services to Boston & Prado Tree Lighting Advanced Fiber-Optic Network Will Support Businesses, Bring Consumer Choice to Residents Mayor Martin J. Walsh re- working with Verizon to bring cently announced the City of more choice and upgraded Boston has issued a Final Cable technology to Boston’s residents Television (CATV) License to Ve- and businesses.” rizon New England. The license In April, the City of Bos- covers three neighborhoods: ton and Verizon announced Dorchester, the Dudley Square a partnership to bring a new neighborhood in Roxbury and fi ber-optic network platform to West Roxbury. The license an- Boston, replacing copper infra- ticipates future expansion of the structure. Since then, Verizon service area to additional neigh- has been constructing their net- borhoods, with the fi rst service work and has already installed area expansion expected to fi ber-optic wiring necessary to include Hyde Park, Mattapan, offer service to 25,000 homes and other areas of Roxbury and and businesses by year’s end. Jamaica Plain. The signing of the cable license “Boston will continue to grow clears the way for Verizon to and thrive, and Boston’s resi- begin selling Fios service before dents need fast, reliable com- the end of the year. (Photo by Matt Conti, northendwaterfront.com) munications services built on “We are appreciative of the the latest technologies,” said In his third neighborhood trolley tour, Mayor Mayor were local elected offi cials City Councilor Mayor Walsh.
    [Show full text]
  • TWENTIETH REPORT Judicial Council of Massachusetts
    Public Document TWENTIETH REPORT Judicial Council of Massachusetts FOR TABLES OF CONTENTS OF REPORTS 1 to 15, 1924 TO 1939 AND A LIST OF REPORTS OF COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS AND OTHER MATERIAL RELATING TO THE HISTORY OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SINCE 1780, SEE 15th. REPORT (1939) 93-108. FOR THE HISTORY OF THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL AND ITS RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESULTS OF ITS WORK, SEE 14th. REPORT (1938) 43-73. CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT page Index to Statistical T a b l e s ............................................................................................... 2 T he Act C reating the C ouncil — M em bers of C o u n c il .................................... 4 I ntroductory R emarks and C hapter 27 of R esolves of 1925 . 5 R ecommendations Adopted in 1943 ................................................................................. 6 E mergency J urors and W aiver of F ull J ury in C riminal C ases — D raft A c t ............................................................................................................................... 7 Consolidation of C ases for T rial under St. 1943 c. 369 D raft Act . 14 Procedure for D eclaratory J udgments in C iv il C ases — D raft A ct . 15 A P lan for an O ptional Alternative P rocedure w ithin the Superior C ourt for R ehearing w ithout P rinting M atters of L aw in C ivil Cases — D raft A c t ............................................................................................................. 21 N ew T rials W hen D amages Awarded Are I nadequate — D raft A ct . 25 D istrict C ourts and F ull-tim e J udicial Service — D raft Acts . 28 P robate C ourts — P ractice as to A uthority to C arry on B usiness of a D eceased P erson — D raft Ac t .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • One Stop Cori Sealing in Boston Municipal Court
    BOOKLET 5 ONE STOP CORI SEALING IN BOSTON MUNICIPAL COURT Boston Municipal Court Standing Order 1:09 permits people who have cases in more than one division of the Boston Municipal Court (BMC) to seal them all at the same time in one court if they are asking to seal at least three charges. This only applies to cases that ended in dismissal, a not guilty finding, or a nolle prosequi (the D.A. dropped the case). A case that ended in a nolle prosequi is often listed as “NP” on a CORI report. STEP 1. Figure out if you’re eligible to seal at least three charges in the BMC. The BMC includes the following 8 courthouses located at: Roxbury Dorchester West Roxbury Brighton Charlestown East Boston South Boston BMC Central (Ed Brooke Courthouse, 24 New Chardon St., Boston) You can use this process if you have: 3 or more charges that you are asking to seal in the Boston Municipal Court (BMC): The charges or cases are closed and were dismissed or ended in a nolle prosequi (the D.A. dropped the case), or a “not guilty” finding. For example, Sam lives in Roxbury and was found “not guilty” in 1 case in Roxbury and has 5 dismissed cases in Dorchester. He can file a petition in Roxbury to seal the 6 cases. STEP 2. If you want to seal all of the BMC cases at the same time, figure out where to go to use the new “one stop” process. You must file the petition to seal in the BMC division whose jurisdiction covers where you live if any of the cases you’re trying to seal are from that court.
    [Show full text]