Whitley v. Com.
Decision Date | 05 December 1975 |
Citation | 339 N.E.2d 890,369 Mass. 961 |
Parties | Jesse B. WHITLEY v. COMMONWEALTH (and a companion case 1 ). |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
William J. Leahy, Boston, for Jesse B. Whitley.
Max D. Stern, Boston, for Lawrence C. Searcy.
Robert V. Greco, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the Com.
Ernest Winsor, Boston, for Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and another, amici curiae, submitted a brief.
Before TAURO, C.J., and REARDON, QUIRICO, BRAUCHER and WILKINS, JJ.
RESCRIPT.
These are two matters reserved and reported without decision by a single justice, where the petitioners severally seek relief under G.L. c. 211, § 3. In the Searcy case there were applications for issuance of process against one Boston police officer for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and against two Boston police officers for threats. A judge of the Municipal Court of the City of Boston declined to issue process. In the Whitley case the petitioner applied in the Municipal Court of the Dorchester District for issuance of process against one Boston police officer for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and against another for assault with a dangerous weapon. In this case, after conducting a hearing at which the petitioner, the officers and their witnesses were examined, the clerk of the court declined to issue process. A judge of the Municipal Court of the Dorchester District, while upholding the propriety of the procedures employed by the clerk, ordered a hearing to be held before him on the petitioner's application but stayed proceedings pending this court's disposition of the present petition. We have no inclination to invoke G.L. c. 211, § 3, in response to the petitions. The rights asserted by the petitioners are not private but are in fact lodged in the Commonwealth as it may proceed to enforce its laws. Pugach v. Klein, 193 F.Supp. 630, 635 (S.D.N.Y. 1961). '(I)n American jurisprudence . . . a private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another.' S. v. D., 410 U.S. 614, 619, 93 S.Ct. 1146, 1149, 35 L.Ed.2d 536 (1973). Compare COREY V. COMMONWEALTH, --- MASS. ---, 301 N.E.2D 450 (1973)A, and Myers v. Commonwealth, 363 Mass. 843, 298 N.E.2d 819 (1973), where this court did exercise jurisdiction under G.L. c. 211, § 3, to review preliminary criminal proceedings when substantive rights of the petitioners were directly involved. The petitioners, if...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Local 1445, United Food and Commercial Workers Union v. Police Chief of Natick
...of the general public. Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619, 93 S.Ct. 1146, 1149, 35 L.Ed.2d 536 (1973). Whitley v. Commonwealth, 369 Mass. 961, 962, 339 N.E.2d 890 (1975). As to the injunction sanction in G.L. c. 136, § 10, the category of persons who may employ it is similarly limi......
-
Commonwealth v. Clerk-Magistrate of the West Roxbury Division of the District Court
...improperly interferes with the prosecutorial discretion of the executive branch.[6] The clerk-magistrate's reliance on Whitley v. Commonwealth, 369 Mass. 961, for the proposition that a show cause hearing may be held prior to the issuance of process on a felony complaint is misplaced. In th......
-
Commonwealth v. CLERK-MAGISTRATE OF THE WEST ROXBURY DIV. OF THE …
...improperly interferes with the prosecutorial discretion of the executive branch.6 The clerk-magistrate's reliance on Whitley v. Commonwealth, 369 Mass. 961 (1975), for the proposition that a show cause hearing may be held prior to the issuance of process on a felony complaint is misplaced. ......
-
Victory Distributors, Inc. v. Ayer Division of the District Court Department
...v. Williams, 419 Mass. 1001, 1001-1002 (1994); Taylor v. Newton Div. of the Dist. Court Dep't, supra at 1006; Whitley v. Commonwealth, 369 Mass. 961, 962 (1975). Nonetheless, Victory asserts that it has a right to a probable cause hearing on its applications before a judge or clerk-magistra......