Commonwealth v. Alfonso

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that the Superior Court Appellate Division had jurisdiction to review the defendant's concurrent three-to-five-year felony sentences, despite the defendant being committed to MCI Framingham. The court concluded that the sentence was a state-prison sentence under G. L. c. 278, § 28A, and that interpreting the statute to restrict women's appellate rights would be inconsistent with sentencing reforms and equal-protection principles. The court affirmed denial of the defendant's Mass. R. Crim. P. 30(a) motion.

Holdings

1. Because G. L. c. 278, § 28A, provides no mechanism for appellate review of an Appellate Division decision, the Supreme Judicial Court may resolve a challenge to the Appellate Division's jurisdiction under its general superintendence authority pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3.
2. A sentence of three to five years to MCI Cedar Junction to serve at MCI Framingham is a sentence to the state prison and was within the statutory jurisdiction of the Appellate Division.
3. After the 1994 sentencing reforms, G. L. c. 278, § 28A, cannot be interpreted to deny women appellate review of state-prison sentences of five years or less when similarly situated men may appeal; the woman's sentence is appealable when the conviction facts or sentence length establish that it is a state-prison sentence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Judicial Court could review Alfonso's challenge to the subject-matter jurisdiction of the Appellate Division under its general superintendence power pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3.
2. Whether a sentence to MCI Cedar Junction to serve at MCI Framingham constituted a sentence to the state prison reviewable by the Appellate Division under G. L. c. 278, § 28A.
3. Whether G. L. c. 278, § 28A, could be interpreted to restrict women to appellate review only of state-prison sentences exceeding five years after the 1994 sentencing reforms eliminated gender-based sentencing distinctions.

Disposition

affirmed