Posts tagged "Galazka"

Commonwealth v. Galazka (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-131-13)

NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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;       11‑P‑1629                                       Appeals Court   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  MICHAEL GALAZKA. No. 11‑P‑1629.      October 25, 2013.   Practice, Criminal, Fees and costs, Affidavit, Admissions and confessions, Hearsay.  Rape.  Evidence, Age, Admissions and confessions, Hearsay.       Following a jury-waived trial in Superior Court, defendant Michael Galazka was convicted of statutory rape of a child (two counts), aggravated rape of a child, and assault and battery.  We affirm, and take this opportunity to emphasize that before a judge is required to conduct a hearing on a pretrial motion for “[e]xtra fees and costs” pursuant to G. L. c. 261, §§ 27A-27G, and to make any findings and rulings, the defendant must file with the clerk of court, an affidavit of indigency that is “sworn to under oath.”  G. L. c. 261, § 27B, inserted by St. 1974, c. 694, § 3.   The evidence presented at the jury-waived trial warranted the finding that on several occasions the defendant had sexual intercourse at his home with a fifteen year old girl (first victim), and that there was a separate incident at the defendant’s home in which he digitally penetrated another young female (second victim), who was the first victim’s twelve year old friend.     Discussion.  1.  The defendant had no right to a hearing on his motion for funds to hire an investigator.  The defendant was represented by retained counsel.  On April 12, 2010, defense counsel filed a motion for funds requesting _to be heard ex parte on the issue of appropriating funds to hire an investigator._  In that motion, counsel stated that the defendant was indigent and that an affidavit of indigency would be filed by the defendant at the pretrial conference scheduled for April 16, 2010.  On April 16, 2010, with the defendant present, the judge conducted a hearing on the defendant’s motion to continue the trial from April 30, 2010, to August 20, 2010.  Defense counsel briefly restated the background facts as to the defendant’s indigency that he had provided to the court during a hearing on April 9, 2010, adding that he had prepared an affidavit of indigency based on the defendant being unemployed and receiving only unemployment benefits.  Defense counsel stated, “I have the affidavit of indigency to show the Commonwealth, and what it shows is unemployment income of 276 a week.”  However, there is no docket entry […]


Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - October 25, 2013 at 9:20 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,