Lykus v. Commonwealth

Aug 7, 1996
Reporters:
, ,

The appellant, who is currently incarcerated at the Bay State Correctional Center, sought relief pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3 (1994 ed.), ‍‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​‌‍from the denial in the Superior Court of his “motion to correct illegal sentence.” A single justice of this court denied relief. This matter is not within S.J.C. Rule 2:21, 421 Mass. 1303 (1995), because the appellant is seeking postconviction relief, not ‍‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​‌‍relief from an interlocutory order of a trial court.

The appeal lacks merit in any event. Because the appellant was convicted of a capital offense, and his direct appeal has already been decided by this court, Commonwealth v. Lykus, 367 Mass. 191 (1975), S.C., 406 Mass. 135 (1989), he may ‍‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​‌‍pursue an appeal from the denial of his motion only by leave of a single justice of this court. See G. L. c. 278, § 33E (1994 ed.). See also Commonwealth v. Ambers, 397 Mass. 705, 710 n.6 (1986). To the extent that the single justice denied relief ‍‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​‌‍under G. L. c. 211, § 3, he did not abuse his discretion or commit an error of law. To the extent that he denied leave to appeal under the “gatekeeper” provision of § 33E, that decision is final and unreviewable. Commonwealth v. Ambers, supra at 710-711. Because ‍‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​​​​​​​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​‌‍the appellant is not entitled to relief there is no reason to consider his petition for habeas corpus ad testificandum.

Appeal dismissed.