Commonwealth v. Nanny
462 Mass. 798
| Mass. | 2012Background
- Commonwealth seeks direct appellate review to require §72A transfer hearing before §54 youthful offender indictment for acts allegedly committed before age 17 and not arrested until after 18.
- §72A imposes a two-step inquiry: probable cause, then whether public interest justifies prosecution; hearing precedes criminal proceedings.
- §54 allows youthful offender indictments but with procedures that historically followed different routes than §72A transfers.
- Defendant allegedly committed offenses between ages 16 and 17; apprehended in 2008 at age 26.
- Juvenile Court dismissed youthful offender indictments for lack of §72A hearing; Commonwealth appealed.
- Court holds §72A hearing is mandatory before indictment under §54 when the triggering conditions are met; remands for proceedings consistent with this decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is a §72A hearing required before proceeding on §54 indictment? | Commonwealth: §72A not required for §54 indictments. | Spence (Dale): §72A must precede prosecution once criteria met. | Yes; §72A hearing required before §54 indictment. |
| Does §72A apply to §54 cases despite its reference to a delinquency complaint? | Commonwealth: §72A limited to complaints, not indictments. | Defendant: §72A applies when trigger conditions met; transfer precedes indictment. | §72A applies; transfer precedes indictment. |
| Does §54 exempt the case from §72A by its procedural language? | Commonwealth: §54 only requires §§ 55-72; no §72A needed. | Defendant: §72A not displaced; omission purposeful but not exclusive. | Not exempt; §72A governs when triggered. |
| Can grand jury probable cause substitute for §72A’s first prong? | Commonwealth: grand jury finding suffices for probable cause. | Defendant: grand jury lacks §72A protections and process; not substitute. | Grand jury is not an adequate substitute. |
| Does grand jury progress obviate the second prong of §72A (public interest)? | Commonwealth: possibility of prosecution is sufficient via grand jury. | Defendant: §72A second prong remains essential; grand jury does not address it. | Second prong remains essential; not satisfied by indictment alone. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Clint C., 430 Mass. 219 (Mass. 1999) (context of youthful offender transfer procedures)
- Commonwealth v. Porges, 460 Mass. 525 (Mass. 2011) (probable cause standard in §72A context)
- Commonwealth v. Dale D., 431 Mass. 757 (Mass. 2000) (youthful offender and §54 interaction)
- Commonwealth v. Russ R., 433 Mass. 515 (Mass. 2001) (juvenile to adult transition under §54)
- D’Urbano v. Commonwealth, 345 Mass. 466 (Mass. 1963) (jurisdictional considerations in juvenile context)