Title: Daley v. Commonwealth
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SJC-13519
State: Massachusetts
Issuer: Massachusetts Supreme Court
Date: March 29, 2024

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revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 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-13519 
 
ORRETT DALEY  vs.  COMMONWEALTH. 
 
 
March 29, 2024. 
 
 
Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts, 
Appeal from order of single justice. 
 
 
 
 
Orrett Daley appeals from a judgment of the county court 
denying, without a hearing, his petition for relief under G. L. 
c. 211, § 3, on the ground that he has an adequate remedy in the 
normal appellate process.  We affirm. 
 
 
Daley has been charged in the District Court with operating 
a motor vehicle while under the influence of liquor and other 
offenses.  He filed a motion for third-party records, 
specifically, personal telephone records of the State police 
trooper1 who conducted the motor vehicle stop that resulted in 
the charges.  That motion was denied, as was a motion for 
reconsideration.  Some months later, Daley filed a motion to 
impose sanctions on the Commonwealth for an alleged lack of 
compliance with a discovery order and a request for records 
based on new evidence.  That motion and request were also 
denied.  Daley's G. L. c. 211, § 3, petition challenged these 
interlocutory rulings. 
 
 
The case is before us pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21 (2), as 
amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001), which requires Daley to file a 
 
1 The trooper filed a motion to intervene in the county 
court proceedings.  The single justice, having ruled that Daley 
was not entitled to relief, denied the motion to intervene as 
moot.  That ruling has not been challenged before us. 
 
 
2 
record appendix and memorandum "set[ting] forth the reasons why 
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."2  Daley cannot make this showing.  The 
adverse rulings can be addressed on appeal if he is convicted of 
any offense.  Daley asserts that he should not have to await 
conviction and appeal, but offers no reason why this ordinary 
process, applicable in any other case where a criminal defendant 
unsuccessfully moves for discovery, is inadequate in his case.  
The single justice neither erred nor abused his discretion by 
denying relief. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed. 
 
 
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by 
a memorandum of law. 
Michael A. McLaughlin for the petitioner. 
 
2 Daley has filed a brief, which we are treating as the 
memorandum required by the rule.