Posts tagged "1015717"

Commonwealth v. Muckle (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-157-17)

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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;



October 6, 2017.

Intimidation of WitnessDistrict Court, Jurisdiction.  Boston Municipal CourtPractice, Criminal, Sentence, Mittimus.

Paul Muckle was convicted in the Boston Municipal Court Department (BMC) of intimidating a person furthering a court proceeding, see G. L. c. 268, § 13B, and other offenses.  The alleged victim of Muckle’s intimidation was opposing counsel in a civil action commenced by Muckle in Federal court.  His posttrial motion to vacate the intimidation conviction was allowed, and that charge was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in the BMC.  On the parties’ cross appeals, the Appeals Court reversed the dismissal of the intimidation charge and affirmed the convictions.  Commonwealth v. Muckle, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 384 (2016).  A dissenting Justice would have affirmed the dismissal.  See id. at 397-402 (Rubin, J., dissenting in part and concurring in part).  We granted Muckle’s application for further appellate review, 476 Mass. 1111 (2017), limited to the issue of whether, under G. L. c. 218, § 26, the BMC and the District Court have jurisdiction over prosecutions under G. L. c. 268, § 13B, for intimidation of persons other than a witness or juror.  For essentially the reasons stated by the dissenting Appeals Court Justice, we conclude that such jurisdiction was absent.  We therefore affirm the order dismissing the intimidation charge. read more


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - October 6, 2017 at 9:12 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,