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
Under the unusual. circumstances o f this case, where a Superior Court judge abused his discretion and exceeded the statutory authority of G.L.c. 265, 5 47 by arbitrarily and indiscri- minately imposing a GPS monitoring device on the defendant (hereafter "Aldrich"), who was _I not a convicted sex offender, resulted in a "substantial burden on [his] liberty," which clearly violated Aldrich's fundmental constitutionally protected rights under - both the federal and state constitutions. col-y, supra at 572. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, and effects' against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall. not be violated." Fourth Amendment, U.S. I I Const. (Addendum, p. 2). ! Article.14 of the Massachusetts Constitution ! ~ C. Governmental GPS monitoring tracking, t and surveillance of Aldrich s movements and activities, pursuant to G.L.c. 265, It7, violated Aldrich's fundamental constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment and Art. 14 from unreasonable r, search e s " and " seizures I' Declaration of Rights gurarantees tha,t [Elvery subjectc'has a right to be secure from all unreason- able searches, and seizures, of his person, his tI house, his papers, and all of his possessions. . 34
Art. 14 Declaration of Rights, Mass. Constitution (Addendum, p. 8). - First, under both the Fourth Amendment and Art. 14, unarguably, a person has an exclusionary right over his or her body, and a reasonable ex- pectation of privacy of hi6 or her person. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)(Fourth Amend- ment expectation of privacy "protects people, not places"); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)(Surgical intrusion into an individual's body €or evidence, however, implicates expectations of privacy. The overriding function of the Fourth Amendment i s to protect personal privacy and dignity against unwarranted intrusion by the state"); Virginia v. Moore, 128 S. Ct. 1598 (2008) (the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable seizures of a person). See also Commonwealth V. Gomes, 453 Mass. 506, 507 n. 1 (2009); Comonwealth v. Blood, 400 Mass. 1 (1987)(Art. 14 expectation of privacy); and Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective Ass'n, Inc., v. State Racing Comm'n, 403 Mass. 692, 706 (1989)(Art. 14 expectation of privacy of body in urine sample). - Second, under federal statute Title 10, c. 136, 8 2281: Global Positioning System (GPS), the United 35
- 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 and 12: STATEMENT OF PRIOR PROCEEDINGS On F
- Page 13 and 14: On September 8, 2009, while on bail
- 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: defense); McKaskle v. Wigpins, 465
- 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
Art. 14 Declaration of Rights, <strong>Mass</strong>. Constitution<br />
(Addendum, p. 8).<br />
-<br />
First, under both the Fourth Amendment and<br />
Art. 14, unarguably, a person has an exclusionary<br />
right over his or her body, and a reasonable ex-<br />
pectation of privacy of hi6 or her person. Katz<br />
v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)(Fourth Amend-<br />
ment expectation of privacy "protects people, not<br />
places"); Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757<br />
(1966)(Surgical intrusion into an individual's<br />
body €or evidence, however, implicates expectations<br />
of privacy. The overriding function of the Fourth<br />
Amendment i s to protect personal privacy and<br />
dignity against unwarranted intrusion by the<br />
state"); Virginia v. Moore, 128 S. Ct. 1598 (2008)<br />
(the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable<br />
seizures of a person). See also Commonwealth V.<br />
Gomes, 453 <strong>Mass</strong>. 506, 507 n. 1 (2009); Comonwealth<br />
v. Blood, 400 <strong>Mass</strong>. 1 (1987)(Art. 14 expectation<br />
of privacy); and Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective<br />
Ass'n, Inc., v. State Racing Comm'n, 403 <strong>Mass</strong>. 692,<br />
706 (1989)(Art. 14 expectation of privacy of body<br />
in urine sample).<br />
-<br />
Second, under federal statute Title 10, c. 136,<br />
8 2281: Global Positioning System (GPS), the United<br />
35
Change language