Commonwealth v. Wimer, 480 Mass. 1

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that the phrase "second and subsequent adjudication or conviction" in the sex offender registration statute requires a prior conviction before a later conviction can trigger registration. Because the defendant's two convictions for open and gross lewdness were entered in the same proceeding, the second conviction was not subsequent, and the order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence was reversed.

Holdings

1. The phrase requires two adjudications or convictions, with the second occurring after the first; convictions adjudicated in the same judicial proceeding do not satisfy the statutory requirement.
2. Wimer's two convictions, adjudicated in the same proceeding, did not constitute a second and subsequent conviction under § 178C; therefore, the order requiring him to register as a sex offender was not authorized by the statute.
3. The court would not defer to the Board's interpretation because the statutory language is unambiguous and the Board's interpretation renders "subsequent" superfluous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the phrase "second and subsequent adjudication or conviction" in G. L. c. 6, § 178C requires the second adjudication or conviction to occur after a prior adjudication or conviction in a separate proceeding.
2. Whether Wimer's two convictions adjudicated in the same proceeding triggered the sex-offender-registration requirement for a second and subsequent conviction of open and gross lewdness.
3. Whether the District Court properly denied Wimer's Rule 30(a) motion to correct the registration requirement as an illegal sentence.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded