Commonwealth v. O'Leary, AC 16-P-557

On April 19, 2014 the defendant's Jeep left Route 3, struck an exit sign, and rolled over multiple times; both the defendant and passenger Patricia Murphy suffered serious injuries and were taken to South Shore Hospital.
Trooper Gray responded, briefly interviewed both at the scene, followed the ambulances to the hospital, and conducted further interviews there; both initially claimed to be passengers but the defendant later admitted driving after Miranda warnings.
Gray intended to prepare and mail a criminal citation; he left his citation book in his patrol car, filed a report with his supervisor, and waited nine days for approval before preparing the citation.
The citation was mailed April 28 but due to an incorrect ZIP code it did not reach the defendant for an additional five to six weeks.
The judge found the defendant and Murphy expected no charges and did not seek counsel before receiving the citation; the judge nonetheless credited Gray's testimony that he told the defendant at the hospital he would receive a summons but concluded the defendant was not put on effective notice.
The Superior Court dismissed the indictment under G. L. c. 90C, § 2 for failure to give a citation at the time and place of violation; the Appeals Court reversed, finding an applicable statutory exception.

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether G. L. c. 90C, § 2 requires dismissal where no citation was given at the scene and significant delay occurred in mailing it	The statute’s exception for a circumstance “not inconsistent with the purpose” applies here because the accident and injuries (plus Trooper Gray’s hospital statement that a summons would be mailed) put the defendant on notice; dismissal not required	Failure to give a citation at time/place and an unexplained nine‑day delay (plus weeks from mailing error) violate § 2; defendant lacked meaningful notice and was prejudiced	Reversed dismissal: court held the third exception applies—serious injuries and the officer’s hospital statement satisfied the statute’s purpose and justified delayed issuance
Whether the officer’s nine‑day delay (and later mailing error) was permissible under § 2’s requirement that the citation be issued "as soon as possible"	The delay was not dispositive; serious injuries, practical impediments at hospital, and eventual issuance satisfied the statute’s objectives	The nine‑day administrative delay (and weeks caused by incorrect ZIP code) was unjustified and undermined the statute’s uniform, anti‑manipulation purpose; dismissal appropriate	Court found the delay relatively inconsequential here given notice and seriousness of event; citation issuance and mailing later cured the defect

Commonwealth v. Carapellucci, 429 Mass. 579 (Mass. 1999) (§ 2 applied strictly where applicable)
Commonwealth v. Pappas, 384 Mass. 428 (Mass. 1981) (purpose of citation statute: prevent manipulation and provide prompt notice)
Commonwealth v. Giannino, 371 Mass. 700 (Mass. 1977) (notice requirement unnecessary where knowledge of wrongful character is essential to offense)
Commonwealth v. Babb, 389 Mass. 275 (Mass. 1983) (serious offenses may render citation notice less critical)
Commonwealth v. Kenney, 55 Mass. App. Ct. 514 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002) (serious injuries and awareness may excuse on‑the‑spot citation)
Commonwealth v. Moulton, 56 Mass. App. Ct. 682 (Mass. App. Ct. 2002) (officer’s oral hospital notice plus serious accident justified mailing citation)
Commonwealth v. Cameron, 416 Mass. 314 (Mass. 1993) (discussion of life‑threatening injuries as basis for implied notice)
Commonwealth v. Mullins, 367 Mass. 733 (Mass. 1975) (dismissal where citation mailed many days after violation without explanation)
Commonwealth v. Correia, 83 Mass. App. Ct. 780 (Mass. App. Ct. 2013) (statutory exceptions described; Commonwealth bears burden to prove exception)
Commonwealth v. Burnham, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 483 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016) (dismissal affirmed where long delay in issuing citation precluded notice for OUI charge)