Madison v. Commonwealth, 466 Mass. 1033

Brown Madison appeals a single justice's denial of a G. L. c. 211, § 3 petition seeking review of a protective order restricting disclosure of witnesses’ identifying information in a murder/robbery case.
The Superior Court granted partial discovery protection—addresses and phone numbers withheld; names not fully protected.
The petition argues the order violates State and Federal rights and impairs defense preparation and effective counsel.
The Supreme Judicial Court (Rule 2:21) requires a showing that direct appeal cannot adequately review the order; Brown Madison failed to show this.
The court held review under § 3 is not warranted for discovery orders here and declined extraordinary intervention; judgment affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is review under G. L. c. 211, § 3 available for this discovery order?	Brown Madison contends § 3 is appropriate for important constitutional rights.	Commonwealth maintains § 3 review is generally not available for discovery disputes.	No; discovery disputes are not reviewable under § 3 here.
Did Brown Madison demonstrate the order cannot be reviewed on direct appeal?	Insufficient opportunity to present constitutional rights without immediate relief.	He did not show direct appeal cannot adequately review the order.	He failed to establish adequacy of direct appellate review.
Should extraordinary interlocutory relief under Rule 2:21 be used for first-impression issues?	Issues are novel and constitutional.	Interlocutory review not necessary; issues can wait for appeal after conviction.	Not warranted; issues can be reviewed on direct appeal.

Deming v. Commonwealth, 438 Mass. 1007 (Mass. 2002) (discovery disputes generally not reviewable under § 3)
Carr v. Howard, 426 Mass. 514 (Mass. 1998) (discovery disputes generally not reviewable under § 3)
Ray v. Commonwealth, 447 Mass. 1008 (Mass. 2006) (rejection of relief under § 3 for discovery issues)
Carvalho v. Commonwealth, 460 Mass. 1014 (Mass. 2011) (issues appropriate for direct appeal; no § 3 review)
Martin v. Commonwealth, 451 Mass. 113 (Mass. 2008) (single justice reserved and reported—full court review constraints)