Posts tagged "1119415"

Commonwealth v. Nsubuga (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-194-15)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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;   14-P-1899                                       Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  EDWARD KIZITO NSUBUGA.   No. 14-P-1899. Middlesex.     November 2, 2015. – December 29, 2015.   Present:  Agnes, Sullivan, & Blake, JJ. Alien.  Practice, Criminal, Plea, Admission to sufficient facts to warrant finding, New trial.  Statute, Amendment, Effective date.  Constitutional Law, Judiciary, Referendum, Initiative petition.     Complaint received and sworn to in the Waltham Division of the District Court Department on April 26, 2004.   A motion to withdraw an admission to sufficient facts, filed on March 18, 2014, was heard by Tobin N. Harvey, J.     Edward Crane for the defendant. Elizabeth Jane May, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.      SULLIVAN, J.  The defendant, Edward Kizito Nsubuga, appeals from the denial of his motion to withdraw an admission to sufficient facts.  The defendant contends that he was entitled to receive the statutory immigration warnings set forth in the 2004 amendments to G. L. c. 278, § 29D, as appearing in St. 2004, c. 225, § 1 (amended statute), and that the immigration warnings he received were inadequate to place him on notice that an admission to sufficient facts might result in deportation from the United States.  We conclude that the 2004 amendments to the statute were not in effect at the time of his admission, and affirm. Background.  The defendant was charged with assault and battery in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 13A(a), on April 26, 2004.  A citizen of Uganda, he was a lawful resident alien of the United States at the time of the arrest.  On October 21, 2004, the defendant admitted to sufficient facts.  The defendant was provided with an immigration warning that comported with G. L. c. 278, § 29D, as appearing in St. 1996, c. 450, § 254 (1996 statute).[1]  His case was continued without a finding, and the defendant was placed on probation.  Approximately one year later, the case was dismissed. The warnings provided under the 1996 statute[2] informed the defendant that a plea of guilty might result in immigration consequences, but did not explicitly state that an admission to sufficient facts might also have immigration consequences.  In January of 2014, the defendant was arrested by an agent of the office of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement.  Deportation proceedings ensued.  The defendant then filed a motion to withdraw his admission to sufficient facts.  He argued that at the time of his admission he was not […]


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - December 29, 2015 at 9:36 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,