Robinson v. Commonwealth

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed judgments denying Leon Robinson's petitions under G. L. c. 211, § 3, concerning an order permitting the Commonwealth to obtain his blood for DNA testing and an order denying preservation of a blood stain on his jacket. The court held that because the challenged orders were interlocutory, Robinson failed to show under S.J.C. Rule 2:21 that review could not adequately be obtained after a final adverse judgment.

Holdings

1. Robinson was not entitled to interlocutory relief because he failed to demonstrate why the legality of the blood seizure could not be adequately reviewed on appeal from a final adverse judgment.
2. Robinson was not entitled to interlocutory relief because he failed to show that his claims concerning destruction of the blood stain and the insufficiency of a photograph could not be adequately reviewed on direct appeal after a conviction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Robinson could obtain interlocutory relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3 from the Superior Court's order authorizing seizure of his blood sample when he could challenge the seizure after a final adverse judgment.
2. Whether Robinson could obtain interlocutory relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3 from the order permitting DNA testing that would consume the blood stain when the adequacy of a photograph and related evidentiary issues could be reviewed on direct appeal.

Disposition

affirmed