Commonwealth v. Sylvester (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-176-16)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-11966 COMMONWEALTH vs. WILLIAM JOSEPH SYLVESTER. Norfolk. April 4, 2016. – November 9, 2016. Present: Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ.[1] Sex Offender Registration and Community Notification Act. Community Parole Supervision for Life. Constitutional Law, Sex offender, Plea, Assistance of counsel. Practice, Criminal, Plea, Assistance of counsel. Complaint received and sworn to in the Quincy Division of the District Court Department on July 11, 2002. A motion to withdraw a plea of guilty, filed on July 25, 2013, was heard by Mary A. Orfanello, J. The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review. Jeffrey Harris for the defendant. Susanne M. O’Neil, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. Merritt Schnipper, for Committee for Public Counsel Services, amicus curiae, submitted a brief. HINES, J. The issue in this appeal is whether plea counsel was constitutionally ineffective under the right to counsel guaranties of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution or art. 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights when counsel advised the defendant in 2002 that he would need to “register” if he decided to plead guilty to indecent assault and battery, a sex offense under G. L. c. 6, § 178C, without explaining the consequences of sex offender registration. We conclude that plea counsel was not constitutionally ineffective in rendering this advice in 2002, although we leave for another day the question whether such advice would be constitutionally ineffective based on the current statutory scheme for sex offender registration. We affirm the decision of the District Court judge denying the defendant’s motion to vacate his guilty plea.[2] Background. We summarize the material facts in the record, reserving certain details for later discussion.[3] On July 9, 2002, the defendant, then twenty-three years of age, approached a fifteen year old female from behind as she was standing with four teenage friends in a subway station in Quincy. The defendant placed his hands on the female’s buttocks and began to “massage” them. He also tried to prevent her retreat by running in front of her, grabbing her front pockets, and pulling her close to him. The defendant walked away, but returned several minutes later and robbed the one male in the group. He first took thirty dollars from a sweater the male was holding and […]