Jackson v. Com.
| Decision Date | 30 April 1976 |
| Citation | 370 Mass. 855,346 N.E.2d 714 |
| Parties | Anthony JACKSON v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Anthony Jackson, pro se.
John T. Gaffney, Asst. Dist. Atty. (James M. McDonough, Asst. Dist. Atty., with him) for the Com.
Before HENNESSEY, C.J., and REARDON, QUIRICO and BRAUCHER, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
These are appeals to the full court by Jackson from the Dismissal of two petitions filed by him in the county court. The petitions were referred by the court for hearing before a master. Jackson was indicted by the Suffolk County grand jury on April 11, 1973, for the alleged murder of one Ellen Ann Reich. On April 17, 1973, Jackson was arraigned and Mr. Jack Zalkind was appointed as counsel for him. On September 16, 1974, Mr. Zalkind withdrew from the matter with permission of the court. Mr. Albert L. Hutton, Jr., was appointed as Jackson's counsel on November 20, 1974, and was allowed to withdraw on January 16, 1975. Jackson petitioned for the appointment of Mr. Stephen M. Salon as his counsel. Thereafter, on January 16, 1975, Mr. Salon was appointed as Jackson's counsel. On May 30, 1975, Mr. Salon filed a motion to withdraw, alleging that insurmountable differences had arisen between Jackson and him. After a hearing, a judge of the Superior Court allowed Mr. Salon to withdraw as counsel and, after requesting Jackson to submit the names of attorneys to him for possible appointment, the judge appointed Mr. Joseph J. Balliro (whose name was not among those submitted by Jackson) to represent Jackson. Before the master, appointed by this court, Jackson declined either to have counsel appointed or to sign a waiver of appointed counsel for the master's hearing. Accordingly, the master executed a certificate substantially in the form required by S.J.C. Rule 3:10, as amended, --- Mass. --- (1975), modified slightly to reflect in general terms Jackson's contention that he wanted counsel appointed but only as selected by him. The execution of the certificate was within the authority of the master under the order of reference to him. After hearing, the master found that the delay of three years since the offense appears from the court records to have been caused by proceedings initiated by (or in behalf of) Jackson and by his failure (a) to accept and work with assigned counsel, and (b) to keep those assigned willing to work with him. He found that the judges of the Superior Court, who have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Jackson
...his defense. This is the second time this court has considered the delay in bringing this case to trial. In Jackson v. Commonwealth, 370 Mass. 855, 856, 346 N.E.2d 714 (1976), we confirmed a special master's finding that the first three years of delay were attributable to the actions of the......
-
Com. v. Jackson
...in the so-called Reich murder case. The trial of the Reich case was substantially delayed. This delay, as we noted in Jackson v. Commonwealth, 370 Mass. --- B, 346 N.E.2d 714 (1976) was due to the defendant's failure to establish and maintain a satisfactory working relationship with any of ......
- Soule v. Massachusetts Elec. Co.
-
Jackson v. Amaral, 83-1469
...(a) to accept and work with assigned counsel, and (b) to keep those assigned willing to work with him". Jackson v. Commonwealth, 370 Mass. 855, 346 N.E.2d 714 (1976) (rescript opinion). The court concluded: "[i]f Jackson will not accept appointed counsel, he must proceed promptly to trial w......