Com. v. Griffen
| Decision Date | 20 May 2005 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. Kerri A. GRIFFEN. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
RESCRIPT.
Kerri A. Griffen appeals from a judgment granting a petition filed by the Commonwealth seeking relief under G.L. c. 211, § 3. Griffen is charged with alleged criminal violations of a protective order issued under G.L. c. 209A. At trial, a judge of the District Court excluded the protective order from evidence on the ground that it was not properly served. On the Commonwealth's petition, a single justice of this court ordered that this ruling be vacated. We affirm.
The relevant testimony at trial was as follows. Griffen's father obtained the protective order, including no-contact provisions, ex parte from the Probate and Family Court. He was instructed to take a copy to the police department for service. He did so, providing two telephone numbers for Griffen and informing the desk officer that Griffen was homeless (although the protective order indicated that she lived with him). The officer dialed one of the numbers, asked for "Kerri Griffen," and receiving an affirmative response, read the applicable terms of the protective order verbatim. He also told her she could come to the police station to get a copy of the order. She abruptly ended the call. The officer issued a return of service to the Probate and Family Court indicating that the order was served by telephone.1
The purported service by telephone was improper in the circumstances of this case. Under G.L. c. 209A, § 7, the defendant must be served with copies of the complaint, order, and summons unless otherwise ordered by the court. Zullo v. Goguen, 423 Mass. 679, 680, 672 N.E.2d 502 (1996). "When the appropriate law enforcement agency has made a conscientious and reasonable effort to serve the statutorily specified documents on the defendant, but has nevertheless failed, the agency should promptly notify the court so that a judge, if satisfied after a hearing that an appropriate effort has been made, may order that service be made by some other identified means reasonably calculated to reach the defendant." Id. at 681, 672 N.E.2d 502. In this case, the police officer neither served copies of the documents on Griffen nor sought an alternative order from a judge.2
However, the improper service does not render the order inadmissible in a prosecution for an alleged criminal violation of the order. "To establish a violation of G.L. c. 209A, § 7, the Commonwealth must prove that (1) a valid G.L. c. 209A order was entered by a judge and was in effect on the date of the alleged violation; (2) the defendant violated the order; and (3) the defendant had knowledge of the order." Commonwealth v. Silva, 431 Mass. 401, 403, 727 N.E.2d 1150 (2000). It is settled that failure of service is not fatal to a conviction,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Shangkuan
...alleged violation; (2) the defendant violated the order; and (3) the defendant had knowledge of the order.” Commonwealth v. Griffen, 444 Mass. 1004, 1005, 828 N.E.2d 14 (2005), quoting from Commonwealth v. Silva, 431 Mass. 401, 403, 727 N.E.2d 1150 (2000). We are concerned here with the thi......
-
Commonwealth v. MELTON
...of his knowledge of the order. It is well settled that “failure of service is not fatal to a conviction.” Commonwealth v. Griffen, 444 Mass. 1004, 1005, 828 N.E.2d 14 (2005). No due process violation results if the Commonwealth proves that the defendant had actual knowledge of the terms of ......
-
Commonwealth v. Tiernan
...is not served in accordance with § 7, however, "that failure of service is not fatal to a conviction." Commonwealth v. Griffen, 444 Mass. 1004, 1005, 828 N.E.2d 14 (2005). Evidence that the defendant received actual or constructive notice can be used to meet the knowledge element of the cri......
-
Edge v. Com.
...defendant had knowledge of the order." Commonwealth v. Silva, 431 Mass. 401, 403, 727 N.E.2d 1150 (2000). See Commonwealth v. Griffen, 444 Mass. 1004, 1005, 828 N.E.2d 14 (2005). To establish the crime of stalking in violation of G.L. c. 265, § 43 (a), the Commonwealth must prove that the d......