Vinnie v. Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Facility, Norfolk (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-044-18)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-12299 RAYMOND P. VINNIE vs. SUPERINTENDENT, MASSACHUSETTS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTE, NORFOLK. March 21, 2018. Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts. In 1993, Raymond P. Vinnie was convicted of murder in the first degree. After plenary review, we affirmed the conviction and the denial of his motion for a new trial. Commonwealth v. Vinnie, 428 Mass. 161, cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1007 (1998), overruled on another ground by Commonwealth v. Paulding, 438 Mass. 1 (2002). In 2016, Vinnie filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to G. L. c. 248, § 1, in the county court, arguing that he was unlawfully imprisoned pursuant to a void mittimus. A single justice of this court transferred the petition to the Superior Court. A judge in that court denied relief. Vinnie then filed a motion in the county court, seeking to reinstate his petition on the ground that the Superior Court judge made various procedural and substantive errors. The same single justice denied the motion without a hearing. Vinnie appeals from that ruling. The single justice properly denied Vinnie’s motion to reinstate the petition. The Superior Court judge’s decision denying habeas relief was reviewable in the ordinary appellate process. After habeas relief was denied in the Superior Court, Vinnie “could have obtained review by this court only if he was granted leave by a single justice pursuant to the gatekeeper provision of G. L. c. 278, § 33E. He cannot circumvent the gatekeeper provision by filing his petition in the county court in the first instance.” Tyree v. Commonwealth, 449 Mass. 1034, 1034 (2007), cert. denied, 554 U.S. 926 (2008). There was no basis to “reinstate” the petition in the county court. Judgment affirmed. Raymond P. Vinnie, pro se. Eric A. Haskell, Assistant Attorney General, for the respondent. Full-text Opinions
Categories: News Tags: 1004418, Correctional, Facility, Lawyers, massachusetts, Norfolk, Superintendent, Vinnie, Weekly
Dexter v. Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Institution, Concord (Lawyers Weekly No. 11-142-15)
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; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 13-P-1844 Appeals Court MICHAEL DEXTER vs. SUPERINTENDENT, MASSACHUSETTS CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION, CONCORD. No. 13-P-1844. Middlesex. March 9, 2015. – September 11, 2015. Present: Green, Trainor, & Carhart, JJ. Imprisonment, Enforcement of discipline. Administrative Law, Regulations. Regulation. Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on September 10, 2012. The case was heard by Peter B. Krupp, J., on motions to dismiss and for summary judgment, and a motion to reconsider or, in the alternative, to alter or amend the judgment was considered by him. Joan T. Kennedy for the defendant. TRAINOR, J. The plaintiff, Michael Dexter, was a pretrial detainee in custody at the Massachusetts Correctional Institution at Concord (MCI-Concord) for at least part of 2012.[1] The plaintiff filed a complaint seeking a declaration concerning the property that pretrial detainees are allowed to possess at MCI-Concord. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss and the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment. A Superior Court judge denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss and granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, entering a declaratory judgment stating: “103 C.M.R. 403, et seq., shall apply to inmates awaiting trial at MCI-Concord and no such inmate awaiting trial shall be considered a ‘transient inmate’ within the definition of that phrase in 103 C.M.R. 403.06.” The defendant filed a motion to reconsider, or in the alternative, to alter or amend the judgment, which was denied. This appeal followed. On appeal we are asked to determine the proper interpretation and application of the inmate property regulation as it applies to pretrial detainees.[2] Prison administrators are permitted “considerable discretion in the adoption and implementation of prison policies.” Royce v. Commissioner of Correction, 390 Mass. 425, 427 (1983). “However, the limits of such discretion are established by the rules and regulations promulgated by the Department of Correction. Once an agency has seen fit to promulgate regulations, it must comply with those regulations. [A]gency regulations have the force of law.” Ibid. (citations omitted). Here, the Department of Correction is bound by its “inmate property” regulation, as promulgated in 103 Code Mass. Regs. §§ 403.00 (2001) (the regulation). The “Applicability” section of the regulation states that it is applicable to “all inmates, whether sentenced or awaiting trial, incarcerated at state correctional institutions.” 103 Code Mass. Regs. § 403.04 (2001) (emphasis supplied). Section 403.04 makes it clear that […]
Categories: News Tags: 1114215, Concord, Correctional, Dexter, Institution, Lawyers, massachusetts, Superintendent, Weekly
Farewell Superintendent: What Is Johnson’s Legacy in the South End?
By: David Ertischek This week, a new interim superintendent takes over at Boston Public Schools. Interim Boston Public Schools Superintendent John South End Patch News
Leder v. Superintendent of Schools of Concord & Concord-Carlyle Regional School District, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-095-13)
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; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us SJC‑11224 PAUL LEDER[1] vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS OF CONCORD & CONCORD-CARLYLE REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT & others.[2] Middlesex. February 7, 2013. ‑ May 31, 2013. Present: Ireland, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Gants, Duffly, & Lenk, JJ. School and School District. School and School Committee, Superintendent of schools, Regional school district. Municipal Corporations, Contracts. Contract, Bidding for contract, Regional school district. Injunction. Practice, Civil, Preliminary injunction. State Ethics Commission. Conflict of Interest. Civil action commenced in the Superior Court Department on August 15, 2011. A motion for preliminary injunctive relief was heard by Garry V. Inge, J. A petition for interlocutory review was heard in the Appeals Court by Elspeth B. Cypher, J. The Supreme Judicial Court on its own initiative transferred the case from the Appeals Court. Kwabena B. Abboa-Offei for the plaintiff. Adam Simms for the defendants. Andrew P. Botti & David K. Moynihan, for David K. Moynihan & another, amici curiae, submitted a brief. Martha Coakley, Attorney General, & Deirdre Roney, Special Assistant Attorney General, for State Ethics Commission, amicus curiae, submitted a brief. GANTS, J. The issue on appeal is whether, under G. L. c. 268A, § 21 (a), as appearing in by St. 2009, c. 28, § 80, a party may obtain declaratory or injunctive relief rescinding an action taken by a municipal agency based on an alleged violation of G. L. c. 268A, § 23, where the State Ethics Commission (commission) has made no finding of a violation and where the municipal agency has not requested this relief. We conclude that a finding of a violation of § 23 by the commission after an adjudicatory proceeding and a request for rescission by the municipal agency are both prerequisites to the filing of a complaint seeking rescission under G. L. c. 268A, § 21 (a). Because neither prerequisite has been met in this case, we affirm the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction and remand the case to the Superior Court with instructions to dismiss the complaint.[3] Background. The facts are not materially in dispute. The plaintiff, Paul Leder, doing business as Spencer Brook Strings (SBS), operates a musical instrument sale and rental business that rents string instruments to students in various school districts throughout Massachusetts, including the Concord public schools and the Concord-Carlisle Regional School District (collectively, school district). Since […]
Boston School Superintendent to Step Down
Carol Johnson, superintendent of the Boston Public Schools system, will step down after this year. Johnson wrote a letter to the school community and published a video on YouTube Wednesday on how she came to the decision following the recent death of her husband. “This has been a difficult decision but, as you are aware, the loss of my husband and best friend Matthew has been life-altering for me and my entire family,” she said in the video. “After a long and rewarding career that I am truly proud of, I believe it’s time for me to take time to focus more on family, which, of course, always comes first.” In 2012, Johnson was awarded the nation’s highest honor for urban educational leadership, the Richard R. Green Award, presented by the Council of the Great City Schools, according to a Boston Public Schools press release. South End Patch
Superintendent: Counselors Ready as Students, Teachers Return to Classrooms
Boston School Superintendent Carol Johnson sent a reverse 911 call to all public school parents Sunday night. In the message, Johnson thanked Boston police and all other first responders for their work on Marathon Monday and throughout the past week. “We hope your family is safe and well and that you are looking forward to returning to a normal schedule tomorrow, just as we are,” said Johnson. “Our school leaders and counseling teams are ready to help students who may have trouble processing what happened last week – and we have posted resources for parents on our website, at www.bostonpublicschools.org.” South End Patch
Categories: Arrests Tags: Classrooms, Counselors, Ready, Return, Students, Superintendent, Teacher's
Boston Schools Superintendent Shares Tips for Talking with Kids about Marathon Bombing
In the aftermath of Monday’s Boston Marathon bombing, Boston Public Schools Superintendent Carol R. Johnson sent a letter to staff and families of students titled, “Talking with Children about Tragedies,” that was shared via the Warren-Prescott School newsletter on Tuesday morning. In the newsletter, Warren-Prescott Principal Michele Davis wrote: “Our sincere thoughts and prayers go out to all of those affected by yesterday’s events. Our own Melissa Shea ran the Boston Marathon yesterday and her family was among the spectators. I am relieved to report that Melissa and her family are safe.” Davis asked that anyone with information about other Warren-Prescott families that may have been affected by the bombing to contact her at mdavis@boston.k12.ma.us. Boston Public Schools are closed this week for April Vacation. Below is Johnson’s letter: —– Dear BPS families and friends, We hope you and your family are safe tonight. We wish to express our deep gratitude to the first responders, public safety personnel and everyday citizens who stepped in to help today at the Boston Marathon. Many of you have questions about how to talk to your children about today’s events. Below, please find resources from the National Association of School Psychologists, which has prepared tip sheets for parents and teachers to help children, teenagers and adults cope with tragic situations. Among their professional advice (from the NASP website): Remain calm and reassuring. Children will take their cues from you, especially young children. Acknowledge that the threats and uncertainty are unnerving but the likelihood is that you and your children or students will be okay. There is a difference between the possibility of danger and the probability of it affecting them personally. Acknowledge and normalize their feelings. Allow children to discuss their feelings and concerns and encourage any questions they may have regarding this event. Listen and empathize. An empathetic listener is very important. Let them know that others are feeling the same way and that their reactions are normal and expected. Take care of your own needs. Take time for yourself and try to deal with your own reactions to the situation as fully as possible. You will be better able to help your children if you are coping well. If you are anxious or upset, your children are more likely to be so as well. Talk to other adults such as family, friends, faith leaders, or a counselor. It is important not to dwell on your fears by yourself. Sharing feelings with others often makes us feel more connected and secure. Take care of your physical health. Make time, however small, to do things you enjoy. Turn off or monitor the television. It is important to stay […]