Summary
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that a defendant who defaults by failing to appear and is later charged with a new crime remains “on release” for purposes of G. L. c. 276, § 58, so the court may revoke bail. The issuance of a default warrant does not terminate the defendant’s release status while the defendant remains out of custody. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a defendant released on personal recognizance remains on release for purposes of G. L. c. 276, § 58, after defaulting by failing to appear and becoming subject to a default warrant but before being taken into custody.
- Whether a defendant who defaults and is later charged with a new crime may have bail revoked under G. L. c. 276, § 58.
Holdings
- A defendant remains on release for purposes of G. L. c. 276, § 58, so long as the defendant is not in custody after defaulting for failure to appear, even though a default warrant has issued.
- A defendant who is on release under G. L. c. 276, § 58, defaults by failing to appear, and is later charged with committing a new crime is subject to bail revocation.
Key quotations
“The defendant was released subject to certain conditions that restrained his liberty in a way not shared by the public generally.” (473 Mass. at 1021)
“Thus, the issuance of the default warrant did not put an end to the defendant being "on release" for the purposes of § 58.” (473 Mass. at 1021)
“For these reasons, we conclude that a defendant “on release” pursuant to G. L. c. 276, § 58, who defaults for failing to appear and later is charged with committing a new crime is subject to having his bail revoked.” (473 Mass. at 1022)
Factual background
Morales was arraigned in the Boston Municipal Court on a charge of larceny of property over $250 and released on personal recognizance after receiving the statutory bail-revocation warning. He later failed to appear at a pretrial hearing, was defaulted, and became subject to an outstanding default warrant. While not yet in custody, he was charged with a new assault and battery of a family or household member. The Boston Municipal Court denied the Commonwealth's request to revoke bail in the larceny case.
Procedural history
Morales was arraigned on a larceny charge, released on personal recognizance, and later defaulted by failing to appear at a pretrial hearing. After a default warrant issued, he was charged with a new assault and battery offense. The Boston Municipal Court denied the Commonwealth's motion to revoke bail on the larceny matter, reasoning that Morales was no longer on release after the default. The county court single justice reserved and reported the issue to the Supreme Judicial Court.
Remand instructions
The case was remanded to the county court, where the single justice was directed to enter an order vacating the Boston Municipal Court's ruling and remanding the matter to that court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.