Commonwealth v. Domino
465 Mass. 569
| Mass. | 2013Background
- Defendant twice convicted of rape of a child and thus subject to CPSL under G. L. c. 6, §§ 178C-178P.
- After release in 2008, he registered with SORB with a mailing/homeless address, not his actual residence.
- SORB initially classified him as level three after a hearing, establishing ongoing registration obligations.
- In June 2008, police and roommates contradicted the claimed address; defendant later amended residency with SORB to homeless with a mailing address.
- On August 19, 2009, district court amended the complaint to add prior child-rape convictions as predicate offenses triggering CPSL; defendant pled guilty to a $500 fine and CPSL was imposed.
- On appeal, the defendant challenges CPSL imposition, the complaint amendment, and related plea/trial issues; the court affirms all challenged orders.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 178H(a)(1) authorizes CPSL when sentence is a fine | Williamson; CPSL mandatory for those convicted of enumerated offenses. | Lene; CPSL not authorized when only a fine is imposed. | CPSL mandated and commences with sentencing when under supervision replaced by other means. |
| Whether the complaint amendment was form, not substance | Lene; amendment affected essential charges. | Williamson; amendment merely clarifies predicate offenses, not substance. | Amendment was one of form, not substance; proper and non-prejudicial. |
| Whether defense counsel was ineffective for advising against plea | Lene; counsel misadvised regarding CPSL. | Lene had reasonable strategic advice given unsettled law at the time. | No ineffective assistance; advice reasonable under the circumstances. |
| Whether defendant's plea was intelligent where he was not yet a ‘sex offender required to register’ | Lene; obligation to register started at conviction stage. | Plea defective because “required to register” concept not yet triggered. | Defendant was a sex offender required to register under the act; plea intelligent. |
| Whether newly discovered witness recantations warranted a new trial | Lene; recantations undermine conviction. | Recantations credibility issues warrant new trial. | Court did not abuse discretion; credibility issues weighed against new trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Williamson, 462 Mass. 676 (Mass. 2012) (mandates CPSL where defendant has predicate offenses)
- Commonwealth v. Miranda, 441 Mass. 783 (Mass. 2004) (form vs. substance amendment; notice to defendant)
- Commonwealth v. Knight, 437 Mass. 487 (Mass. 2002) (double jeopardy form/ substance analysis for amendments)
- Commonwealth v. Fernandes, 430 Mass. 517 (Mass. 1990) (repeat-offender provisions treated as sentence enhancements)
- Commonwealth v. Kateley, 461 Mass. 575 (Mass. 2012) (Pagan framework; CPSL analysis under 178H(a))
- Commonwealth v. Pagan, 445 Mass. 161 (Mass. 2005) (statutory CPSL applicability; explicit indictment requirement)