Summary
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a probation condition requiring the defendant to have no contact with children under sixteen reasonably prohibited attendance at a car show where minors were present and nearby. The court affirmed the revocation of probation, concluding that the condition provided fair notice and that Crawford v. Washington did not apply to probation violation hearings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a probation condition requiring no contact with children under sixteen provided fair warning that the defendant could not attend and display his automobile at a car show where minors were present.
- Whether the probation revocation was impermissibly based on hearsay evidence under Crawford v. Washington.
Holdings
- A probation condition requiring no contact with children under sixteen reasonably communicated that the defendant had to avoid encounters and proximity to children, refrain from attending places where proximity to children was likely, and promptly remove himself if an encounter arose unexpectedly. In the circumstances of this case, the condition prohibited the defendant's attendance and conduct at the car show.
- Crawford v. Washington does not apply to probation violation hearings.
Key quotations
“The use of the words “no contact” in the defendant’s probation condition, then, is reasonably understood to impose an obligation on the defendant to avoid encountering or engaging children in any way; to refrain from attendance at places where proximity to, and thus an encounter with, children is likely; and promptly to remove himself from such proximity if an encounter arises unexpectedly.” (77)
“The condition is not, as the defendant suggests, simply a requirement not to touch or speak to a child.” (77)
Factual background
The defendant was on probation after pleading guilty to two counts of indecent assault and battery on a child. His probation condition required no contact with the victim and no contact with children under sixteen. While on probation, he attended a weekly car show attended by children, displayed his antique automobile near a food concession stand, and allowed his dog to move through the crowd while children came within several feet to approximately fifteen feet of him. The evidence also indicated that the defendant had previously used a car and a dog to establish relationships with child victims.
Procedural history
The defendant pleaded guilty in the District Court to two counts of indecent assault and battery on a child and received concurrent suspended sentences with probation. After he attended a car show where children under sixteen were present, the District Court found that he violated a probation condition requiring no contact with children under sixteen and revoked probation. The Appeals Court affirmed, and the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the revocation order.