Commonwealth v. Gopaul, 86 Mass. App. Ct. 685

Defendant Christopher Gopaul was charged with selling marijuana on Oct. 28, 2011; one count alleged the sale occurred within 100 feet of the outdoor playground at Windsor Meadows Apartments (a privately owned apartment-complex playground).
The playground is fenced but not fully enclosed; anyone can enter without opening a gate; no access restrictions or signage were present.
Defendant moved to dismiss the § 32J count, arguing the statutory protection for "public park or playground" does not cover privately owned playgrounds; the District Court judge denied the motion and reported questions to the Appeals Court.
The Appeals Court framed two questions: (1) Does the word "public" modify both "park" and "playground" in G. L. c. 94C, § 32J? (2) Can a playground on private property fall within the statute's "public . . . playground" category?
The statutory text at issue imposes enhanced sentencing for certain drug offenses committed "within one hundred feet of a public park or playground," following a separate list that expressly used "public or private" modifiers for schools and preschools.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether "public" modifies both "park" and "playground" in § 32J	Commonwealth: plain text places "public" only before "park," so "playground" is unmodified (apply to any playground)	Gopaul: "public" should modify both words; statute covers only public playgrounds	Held: "public" modifies both; statute applies only to public playgrounds
Whether a privately owned playground that is open to the public falls within "public playground"	Commonwealth: a private playground can be "public" as a factual matter if open to public access	Gopaul: privately owned playgrounds are outside § 32J regardless of accessibility	Held: Ambiguous; must resolve ambiguity in defendant's favor — privately owned playgrounds are outside § 32J

Commonwealth v. Davie, 46 Mass. App. Ct. 25 (1998) (construed disjunctive "park or playground" and addressed vagueness)
Commonwealth v. Hamilton, 459 Mass. 422 (2011) (statutory construction principles; coupling of words and related rules)
Commonwealth v. Thomas, 71 Mass. App. Ct. 323 (2008) ("accredited" construed to modify private preschools/headstart, illustrating how modifiers apply in § 32J)
DiFiore v. American Airlines, Inc., 454 Mass. 486 (2009) (statute construed to avoid internal contradiction and unreasonable results)
Commonwealth v. Vega, 449 Mass. 227 (2007) (courts avoid statutory interpretations that produce illogical results)