Goe v. Commissioner of Probation (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-035-16)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-11841 GEORGE GOE[1] vs. COMMISSIONER OF PROBATION & another.[2] Suffolk. November 2, 2015. – March 14, 2016. Present: Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ. Practice, Criminal, Probation. Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision. Global Positioning System Device. Civil action commenced in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk on January 29, 2015. The case was reported by Cordy, J. Beth L. Eisenberg, Committee for Public Counsel Services (Lily Lockhart, Committee for Public Counsel Services, & Spencer Lord with her) for the petitioner. Steven R. Strom, of Connecticut, for the intervener. Sarah M. Joss, Special Assistant Attorney General, for Commissioner of Probation. U. Gwyn Williams, Laura Carey, & Charles Stones, for Citizens for Juvenile Justice & another, amici curiae, submitted a brief. GANTS, C.J. This case comes to us on a reservation and report from the single justice asking the following questions: “(1) Whether the Massachusetts courts are the appropriate forum for challenging additional probation conditions imposed on a probationer transferred to Massachusetts pursuant to the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision; and, if so, what is the proper mechanism for mounting such a challenge? “(2) Whether a transferee probationer is entitled to actual notice of mandatory [global positioning system (GPS)] monitoring pursuant to G. L. c. 265, § 47[,] from the sentencing judge, or whether such notice is implied or waived by a petitioner’s voluntary transfer to Massachusetts[?] “(3) Whether mandatory GPS monitoring for crimes committed as a minor constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, where the minor was convicted as an adult in another jurisdiction? “(4) Whether the Commissioner of Probation’s Policy on the Issuance of Travel Permits is ultra vires; and, if not, whether the application of that policy to the petitioner violated his right to interstate travel?” In answer to the first question, we conclude that, where a probationer whose supervision is transferred to Massachusetts under the Interstate Compact for Adult Offender Supervision (compact) contends that a special condition of probation that was added by Massachusetts is not mandated by Massachusetts law or is unconstitutional, this determination is appropriately made by a Massachusetts court, and the appropriate mechanism to obtain such a determination is through a complaint for declaratory relief. We also conclude that […]