Title: Commonwealth v. Fontanez

State: massachusetts

Issuer: Massachusetts Supreme Court

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revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 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-11887 
 
COMMONWEALTH  vs.  JOSE M. FONTANEZ. 
 
 
February 3, 2016. 
 
 
Bail.  Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior 
courts. 
 
 
 
This case is before us on a reservation and report from a 
single justice of the county court.  It concerns the same single 
issue that we address in Commonwealth v. Morales, 473 Mass.    
(2016), also decided today:  whether a court has the authority 
to revoke a defendant’s bail pursuant to G. L. c. 276, § 58, 
where the defendant was "on release," defaulted by failing to 
appear, and later was charged with committing a new crime.  
   
  
On May 29, 2014, the defendant was arraigned in the Chelsea 
Division of the District Court Department on criminal charges in 
four separate matters.  It was alleged that he had assaulted the 
same victim on different dates.  In three matters, he was 
charged with assault and battery in violation of G. L. c. 265, 
§ 13A (a), and in a fourth matter, with assault and battery by 
means of a dangerous weapon in violation of G. L. c. 265, 
§ 15A (b).  The court gave the defendant the bail revocation 
warning pursuant to G. L. c. 276, § 58, and released him on 
personal recognizance.  
  
 
In January, 2015,1 the defendant failed to appear in court 
on the District Court matters.  The court found him to be in 
default and issued default warrants. 
                                                          
 
 
1 In the intervening months, the defendant was arrested on 
new charges.  The motion judge noted that in July, 2014, the 
defendant was on release in the District Court matters and 
2 
 
 
 
 
 
The defendant subsequently was arraigned, in April, 2015, 
on a new charge, assault and battery of a family or household 
member, G. L. c. 265, § 13M (a).  At his arraignment, the 
Commonwealth filed a motion to revoke the defendant's bail in 
the Chelsea District Court matters.  The court denied the 
Commonwealth's motion to revoke the defendant's bail on the 
ground that he was no longer subject to bail revocation under 
G. L. c. 276, § 58, sixth par.  Because the defendant defaulted 
in the prior matters, he was no longer "on release," and 
therefore did not commit the new crime "during said period of 
release."  In the new assault and battery matter, the court set 
bail in the amount of $2,000, and imposed conditions on the 
defendant's release.       
 
 
The Commonwealth subsequently filed a petition pursuant to 
G. L. c. 211, § 3, in the county court seeking relief from the 
denial of its motion to revoke the defendant's bail.  The single 
justice reserved and reported the matter to the full court. 
         
 
  In Morales, 473 Mass. at   , we address the reasons why 
we interpret G. L. c. 276, § 58, sixth par., to mean that a 
defendant such as one in the circumstances presented here is 
still “on release” for purposes of bail revocation and why a 
judge therefore has the authority to revoke the defendant’s 
bail.   
 
 
For the reasons there stated, and as in that case, we 
remand the case to the county court where the single justice is 
directed to enter an order vacating the lower court's ruling and 
remanding the matter to that court for further proceedings 
consistent with this opinion.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
So ordered. 
 
 
Donna Jalbert Patalano, Assistant District Attorney, for 
the Commonwealth. 
 
Justin Kyle Brown, Committee for Public Counsel Services, 
for the defendant. 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                           
arraigned on a new crime in the Boston Municipal Court, but the 
Commonwealth did not move to revoke bail on this basis.