Case Title: Morris v. Commonwealth

Citation: 

Docket Number: SJC-13084

State: massachusetts

Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court

Date: 2021-05-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal 
revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 
volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical 
error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of 
Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 
Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA, 02108-1750; (617) 557-
1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us 
 
SJC-13084 
 
ANDRE MORRIS  vs.  COMMONWEALTH. 
 
 
May 25, 2021. 
 
 
Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts.  
Practice, Criminal, Trial of complaints together. 
 
 
 
The petitioner, Andre Morris, appeals from a judgment of a 
single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to 
G. L. c. 211, § 3.  We affirm. 
 
 
Morris has been charged in six separate complaints with, 
among other things, several counts of violating an abuse 
prevention order, in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 13A (b); 
intimidation of a witness, in violation of G. L. c. 268, § 13B; 
stalking in violation of a restraining order, in violation of 
G. L. c. 265, § 43 (b); breaking and entering a building in the 
nighttime with intent to commit a felony, in violation of G. L. 
c. 266, § 16; and assault and battery on a family or household 
member, in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 13M (a).  On the basis 
that the various incidents that led to the charges are 
interconnected, involved the same victim, and occurred within a 
couple of months of one another, the Commonwealth moved to join 
the cases.  A judge in the District Court allowed the motion and 
subsequently denied Morris's motion for reconsideration.  Morris 
thereafter filed his G. L. c. 211, § 3, petition, which a single 
justice denied without a hearing. 
 
 
The case is now before us pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as 
amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001), which requires a showing that 
"review of the trial court decision cannot adequately be 
obtained on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial 
court or by other available means."  S.J.C. Rule 2:21 (2).  
Morris has not made, and cannot make, such a showing.  He 
2 
 
suggests that not reviewing the joinder decision now, at this 
interlocutory stage, could lead to "irreversible consequences or 
irreversible collateral damages."  This is not so.  The decision 
whether to join offenses is a routine, discretionary trial court 
ruling, regularly made and regularly challenged on direct 
appeal.  See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Gaynor, 443 Mass. 245, 260 
(2005), and cases cited (defendant challenged allowance of 
joinder, a decision "committed to the sound discretion of the 
trial judge," in appeal from convictions).  If Morris is 
convicted "and if the judge did in fact abuse [his] discretion 
by joining the offenses for trial, an appellate court can 
reverse the convictions and order new, separate, trials."  Cohen 
v. Commonwealth, 448 Mass. 1005, 1005 (2007). 
 
 
The single justice did not err or abuse her discretion in 
denying relief. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
 
 
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by 
a memorandum of law. 
 
Robert Opsitnick, Jr., for the petitioner.