NO. SJC-10824 PURSUANT TO GLC 211, 5 3 FROM ... - Mass Cases
NO. SJC-10824 PURSUANT TO GLC 211, 5 3 FROM ... - Mass Cases NO. SJC-10824 PURSUANT TO GLC 211, 5 3 FROM ... - Mass Cases
On August 8, 2009, the defendant filed, in Middlesex Superior Court, 'an "Emergency Motion To Vacate Electronic (GPS) Bracelet As A Gondi- tion of Bail Due To Recent Supreme Judicial Court Decision," based 'on the fact that the defendant - was not a convicted sex oEfender. The motion was denied (Kottmyer, J.)(R.A. "13", no. 163). On August 26, 2009, the defendant's bail was posted in the. amount of $5,000.00 cash; however, a note.was written on the bail receipt that the defendant was to be released to bracelet "hold," and defendant was not released from custody (R.A. "24"). On August 31, 2009, the defendant filed, with the.Single Justice of the Supreme Judicial . 11 Court, a Petition To Supreme Judicial Court For Relief Pursuant to G.L.c. 211, ? 3 From A Superior Court Order Requiring Petitioner TO Wear A Global Positioning System (GFS) Device As A Condition Of His Release On.Bai1," which was docketed in' the Supreme Judicial Court on September 3, 2009, , under docket number 2009-0474 (R.A. "25-32"). On September 2, 2009, defendant was released on bail with the GPS electronic bracelet attached to his ankle (R.A. "13," no, 164).
On September 8, 2009, while on bail, the Pro Se defendant filed, in Middlesex Superior Court, a "Petition To Remove Electronic Bracelet As A Condition of Bail," which was denied (Connors, J.)(R.A. "33-35"). On September 8, 2009, the defendant then filed, with the Single Justice of the Supreme ,I Judicial Court, a Motion Requesting Emergency I, Ex Parte Hearing, for a procedural order to vacate the lower court's ruling which forced the defendant to wear a FPS electronic bracelet, which was denied (Cordy, J.)(R.A. "36-38"). On September 17, 2009, a Single Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court (Cordy, J.) denied defendant's Petition for relief pursuant to C.L.C. 211, 5 3 (R.A. "39-40"). On October 8, 2009, defendant filed anew, withniddlesex Superior Court, a "Motion to Vacate Original Order Imposing Electronic GPS Bracelet As A Condition of Bail,'' which was denied (Muse, J.)(R.A. "13", no. 167). On October 22, 2009, defendant filed, with Middlesex Superior Court, a "Motion To Vacate Curfew Due To Use Of Electronic GPS Bracelet Tracking System," which was denied (Muse, J.) (B.A. "13", no. 168). 3
- Page 1 and 2: COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS (1 of
- Page 3 and 4: Case Laws Commonwealth v. Adkinson
- Page 5 and 6: Case Laws Guiney v. Police Comm'r o
- Page 7 and 8: Massachusetts Constitution Article
- Page 9 and 10: I S S U E S P R E S E N T E D 1. WH
- Page 11: STATEMENT OF PRIOR PROCEEDINGS On F
- Page 15 and 16: STATEMENT aF FACTS On January 6, 20
- Page 17 and 18: of bail whereas the defendant was a
- Page 19 and 20: On September 8, and 18, 2009, the P
- Page 21 and 22: that he was - not a convicted sex o
- Page 23 and 24: else he would be setting himself up
- Page 25 and 26: which, remarkably, contained a list
- Page 27 and 28: who threatened the defendant with a
- Page 29 and 30: As a result of three months of cons
- Page 31 and 32: phone call to the defendant from a
- Page 33 and 34: A R G U M E N T S 1. WHERE A COURT
- Page 35 and 36: A R G U M E N T S 2. WHERE PRETRIAL
- Page 37 and 38: In Emelio E, V. Commonwealth, 453 M
- Page 39 and 40: admitted to facts u€ficient for s
- Page 41 and 42: constitutional danger, because it f
- Page 43 and 44: defense); McKaskle v. Wigpins, 465
- Page 45 and 46: Art. 14 Declaration of Rights, Mass
- Page 47 and 48: Here, where Aldrich was released on
- Page 49 and 50: R, Governmental GPS monitoring trac
- Page 51 and 52: Here, in the non fiction, Aldrich n
- Page 53 and 54: 3. WUERE DEFENDANT WAS ALLOWED TO P
- Page 55 and 56: of trial (R.A. "49-50"), in violati
- Page 57 and 58: Thus, where the lower court incorre
- Page 59 and 60: "52-62"), and out of fear and intim
On September 8, 2009, while on bail, the<br />
Pro Se defendant filed, in Middlesex Superior<br />
Court, a "Petition To Remove Electronic Bracelet<br />
As A Condition of Bail," which was denied (Connors,<br />
J.)(R.A. "33-35").<br />
On September 8, 2009, the defendant then<br />
filed, with the Single Justice of the Supreme<br />
,I<br />
Judicial Court, a Motion Requesting Emergency<br />
I,<br />
Ex Parte Hearing, for a procedural order to<br />
vacate the lower court's ruling which forced<br />
the defendant to wear a FPS electronic bracelet,<br />
which was denied (Cordy, J.)(R.A. "36-38").<br />
On September 17, 2009, a Single Justice<br />
of the Supreme Judicial Court (Cordy, J.)<br />
denied defendant's Petition for relief pursuant<br />
to C.L.C. <strong>211</strong>, 5 3 (R.A. "39-40").<br />
On October 8, 2009, defendant filed anew,<br />
withniddlesex Superior Court, a "Motion to Vacate<br />
Original Order Imposing Electronic GPS Bracelet<br />
As A Condition of Bail,'' which was denied (Muse,<br />
J.)(R.A. "13", no. 167).<br />
On October 22, 2009, defendant filed, with<br />
Middlesex Superior Court, a "Motion To Vacate<br />
Curfew Due To Use Of Electronic GPS Bracelet<br />
Tracking System," which was denied (Muse, J.)<br />
(B.A. "13", no. 168).<br />
3
Change language