Com. v. Possehl
| Decision Date | 07 April 1969 |
| Citation | 246 N.E.2d 667,355 Mass. 575 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. William POSSEHL. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Reuben Goodman, Boston, for defendant.
Manuel V. McKenney, Asst. Dist. Atty., (James J. Gillis, Jr., Legal Asst. to the Dist. Atty., with him), for the Commonwealth.
Before WILKINS, C.J., and SPALDING, WHITTEMORE, CUTTER and KIRK, JJ.
The defendant was found guilty in a District Court on a complaint charging him with being the father of an illegitimate child. G.L. c. 273, §§ 11, 12. On October 9, 1967, he appealed to the Superior Court.
On November 15, 1967, the defendant, who is indigent, filed a motion pursuant to G.L. c. 273, § 12A, inserted by St.1954, c. 232, requesting that blood-grouping tests be performed to determine whether he could be excluded as being the father of the child. The motion was allowed, and a laboratory was designated to perform the tests. On May 7, 1968, before the tests were performed the defendant filed a motion for an order that payment for the tests be paid out of the treasury of Suffolk County. G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 213, § 8.
The case is reported, without decision, so far § necessary to present four questions of law 1 which have arisen as a result of the second motion. G.L. c. 278, § 30A, inserted by St.1954, c. 528.
General Laws c. 273, § 12A, prescribes: 'In any proceeding to determine the question of paternity, the court, on motion of the defendant, shall order the mother, her child and the defendant to submit to one or more blood grouping tests, to be made by a duly qualified physician or other duly qualified person, designated by the court, to determine whether or not the defendant can be excluded as being the father of the child.'
Under § 12A favorable results of the tests would exclude the defendant from being the father. Commonwealth v. D'Avella, 339 Mass. 642, 162 N.E.2d 19. The right to obtain the result of such a test is an important right in making a defence against the charge. Its cost cannot be allowed to deprive the defendant of this right. This is the necessary consequence of Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S.Ct. 585, 100 L.Ed. 891; Draper v. Washington, 372 U.S. 487, 83 S.Ct. 774, 9 L.Ed.2d 899; Long v. District Court of Iowa, 385 U.S. 192, 87 S.Ct. 362, 17 L.Ed.2d 290; Roberts v. LaVallee, Warden, 389 U.S. 40, 88 S.Ct. 194, 19 L.Ed.2d 41 (transcript cases), and Smith v. Bennett, Warden, 365 U.S. 708, 81 S.Ct. 895, 6 L.Ed.2d 39 (filing fee). Similar results have been reached elsewhere. State v. Williams, 46 N.J. 427, 217 A.2d 609 (toxicologist). People v. Montgomery, 18 N.Y.2d 993, 278 N.Y.S.2d 226, 224 N.E.2d 730 (transcript). People, on Complaint of Van Epps v. Doherty, 261 App.Div. 86, 24 N.Y.S.2d 821 (blood-grouping test).
By G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 213, § 8, the courts are empowered to order payment from the respective county treasuries of amounts 'for services and expenses incident to their sittings.' By. G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 280, $ 4, 'Expenses arising in a criminal prosecution * * * shall be paid by the county where the prosecution is pending * * *.'
Under § 8 fees were authorized to be paid by a county to an attorney appointed by the court to represent an indigent defendant in a criminal case. Abodeely v. County of Worcester, 352 Mass. 719, 227 N.E.2d 486.
The costs of providing blood-grouping tests are fully as clearly 'expenses arising in a criminal prosecution' which the county is required to pay. The courts, including the Superior Court and the District Courts, have the power to order such payments. This is a duty quite apart from the Federal Constitution or the Constitution of the Commonwealth, both of which require that the payments be made. See Pugliese v. Commonwealth, 335 Mass. 471, 474--475, 140 N.E.2d 476. Under our statutory scheme the duty to make such payments rests upon the counties and not on the Commonwealth. Abodeely v. County of Worcester, supra. Cf. State v. Rush, 46 N.J. 399, 414--415, 217 A.2d 441.
We answer the questions as follows: Nos. 1, 3, and 4, 'Yes.' We do not answer No. 2 which refers to 'subdivision,' a word embracing 'county.'
The case is remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.
So ordered.
1 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Alano
...are adequately protected by G.L. c. 263, § 5A. Commonwealth v. Tessier, 371 Mass. 828, 360 N.E.2d 304 (1977), and Commonwealth v. Possehl, 355 Mass. 575, 246 N.E.2d 667 (1969), relied on by the defendant, are inapposite. In Commonwealth v. Possehl, supra at 577, 246 N.E.2d 667, we held that......
-
O'Coin's, Inc. v. Treasurer of Worcester County
...County of Worcester, 352 Mass. 702, 227 N.E.2d 490; Abodeely v. County of Worcester, 352 Mass. 719, 227 N.E.2d 486; Commonwealth v. Possehl, 355 Mass. 575, 246 N.E.2d 667. 7 Judicial notice may be taken that, without any statutory authority other than G.L. c. 213, § 8, judges of the Superio......
-
Com. v. Lobo
...grouping tests, on motion of the alleged father, in any proceeding to determine the question of paternity. Cf. Commonwealth v. Possehl, 355 Mass. 575, 246 N.E.2d 667 (1969) (State payment of blood grouping tests for indigent defendant in paternity adjudication). See also Little v. Streater,......
-
Williams v. O'NEILL
...and decided that the state was obliged to bear the costs of blood tests for indigent paternity defendants. See Commonwealth v. Possehl, 355 Mass. 575, 246 N.E.2d 667 (1969); Franklin v. District Court, 194 Colo. 189, 571 P.2d 1072 (1977); State ex rel. Graves v. Daugherty, 266 S.E.2d 142 (W......