Elliot v. Commonwealth (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-008-18)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports. If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us SJC-11947 RONNY ELLIOT vs. COMMONWEALTH. January 12, 2018. Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts. Jurisdiction, Juvenile Court, Transfer hearing. Practice, Criminal, Transfer hearing. Department of Youth Services. The petitioner, Ronny Elliot, appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm. In 1995, Elliot was indicted on charges of murder in the first degree, armed assault with intent to murder, and possession of a firearm without a license. He was seventeen years old at the time. He was convicted by a Superior Court jury, in 1997, of the lesser offense of murder in the second degree as well as of the other offenses. This court affirmed the convictions. See Commonwealth v. Elliot, 430 Mass. 498 (1999). Elliot subsequently filed a motion for a new trial in 2000, and an amended motion for a new trial in 2003. After a hearing, the amended motion was denied, in 2008.[1] The Appeals Court affirmed the order denying the motion for a new trial, and this court denied Elliot’s application for further appellate review. See Commonwealth v. Elliot, 80 Mass. App. Ct. 1104 (memorandum and order pursuant to rule 1:28), S.C., 460 Mass. 1115 (2011). Then, in 2015, Elliot filed his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3, in the county court. In the petition, he argued that because he had been “lawfully committed to the Department of Youth Services” at the time of the murder, he was entitled to a transfer hearing pursuant to G. L. c. 119, § 61, which was then in effect.[2] Because no transfer hearing was held, the Superior Court, in Elliot’s view, did not have jurisdiction to try him for murder.[3] The single justice denied the petition, noting that at the relevant time — when the murder occurred in 1995 — a seventeen year old was an adult in the eyes of the juvenile and criminal law. On that basis, Elliot was not entitled to a transfer hearing. In his appeal to this court, Elliot continues to press the argument that he was entitled to a transfer hearing in the Juvenile Court and that because he did not receive one, the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction over his case. General Laws c. 119, § 61, provided at the time that “[t]he [C]ommonwealth […]