Commonwealth v. Rodriguez
461 Mass. 256
| Mass. | 2012Background
- Defendant charged with possession with intent to distribute oxycodone (class B) and marijuana (class D).
- Prosecutor and defendant entered a plea agreement on Nov. 19, 2009; Commonwealth would not indict on pending charges; defendant plead guilty in Boston Municipal Court.
- Defendant agreed to the prosecutor’s sentencing recommendation of concurrent two-and-a-half year terms in a house of correction.
- Judge accepted the plea and sentenced accordingly, but later sua sponte ordered a Rule 29(a) hearing to reconsider the sentence.
- At the Rule 29 hearing (Jan. 6, 2010), the judge revised the sentences to concurrent two-year terms with one year served and two suspended.
- Commonwealth petitioned in Oct. 2010 seeking to vacate the revised sentence and restore the original sentence; case reserved and reported to full court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Rule 29(a) authorize sentence reduction after an agreed sentencing recommendation? | Commonwealth argues judge bound by plea terms and cannot revise. | Gants argues judge may revise if justice may not have been done. | Yes; judge may reduce where justice may not have been done. |
| Does Mass. Rule 12 bind the judge to an agreed recommendation in a plea? | Commonwealth contends agreed recommendation binds judge. | Defendant contends rule 12 permits nonbinding or binding recommendations depending on language. | Rule 12 does not bind the judge to an agreed recommendation; context matters. |
| Can a plea agreement with an agreed recommendation be binding on the Commonwealth and protect its interests? | Commonwealth contends binding agreements protect prosecutorial interests. | Defendant argues judge may revise to achieve just outcome despite agreement. | Agreement may involve binding terms; court permits reconsideration to ensure justice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (1971) (plea agreements require fulfillment of promises; fairness in sentencing)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (sentencing discretion and justice considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Donohue, 452 Mass. 256 (2008) (factors informing just sentence in Massachusetts)
- Commonwealth v. McCulloch, 450 Mass. 483 (2008) (rule 29 allows reconsideration to achieve just sentence)
- Commonwealth v. Dejesus, 440 Mass. 147 (2003) (early guidance on reconsideration of sentences under rule 29)