Title: Dew v. Commonwealth
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: SJC-12506
State: Massachusetts
Issuer: Massachusetts Supreme Court
Date: October 30, 2018

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revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound 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-12506 
 
ANTHONY J. DEW  vs.  COMMONWEALTH. 
 
 
 
October 30, 2018. 
 
 
Supreme Judicial Court, Superintendence of inferior courts. 
 
 
 
Anthony Dew pleaded guilty in the Superior Court to 
multiple counts of trafficking of a person for sexual servitude, 
in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 50 (a); assault and battery with 
a dangerous weapon, in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 15A (b); 
drug distribution, in violation of G. L. c. 94C, §§ 32 (a) and 
32A (a); and other charges.  He subsequently filed a motion for 
a new trial, seeking to withdraw his pleas.  In connection with 
that motion, he filed several additional motions seeking 
postconviction discovery, appointment of counsel, judicial 
notice, and a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, all of 
which were denied.  He then filed a petition in the county court 
for relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3, seeking review of the 
Superior Court judge's orders on the latter motions.  A single 
justice of this court denied the petition without a hearing.  
Dew appeals.  We affirm. 
 
 
Our power of general superintendence under G. L. c. 211, 
§ 3, is reserved for extraordinary circumstances, where a 
petitioner demonstrates both a substantial violation of a 
substantive right and the absence of an adequate alternative 
remedy.  See Watson v. Walker, 447 Mass. 1014, 1014 (2006).  
Relief is properly denied where, as here, the petitioner has an 
adequate alternative avenue to seek review.  See Tavares v. 
Commonwealth, 478 Mass. 1024, 1024 (2018).  "An established 
route for the petitioner to obtain appellate review of the 
denial of his motion for postconviction discovery [and the other 
motions ancillary to his motion for a new trial] would be in 
2 
 
 
connection with an appeal from the denial of his motion for a 
new trial."  Donald v. Commonwealth, 437 Mass. 1007, 1007 
(2002).1  The single justice therefore neither erred nor abused 
his discretion in denying the petition under G. L. c. 211, § 3. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judgment affirmed.  
 
 
 
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by 
a memorandum of law. 
 
Anthony J. Dew, pro se. 
 
                     
 
1 After the single justice of this court denied Dew's G. L. 
c. 211, § 3, petition, a judge of the Superior Court denied his 
motion for a new trial.  Dew has appealed from that ruling, and 
his appeal is currently pending in the Appeals Court.  He can 
raise all of his claims in that appeal.