Added: Comm v. Charles, Milette & Superior Court

In July 2013, the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court ruled on three cases — Comm. v. Shubar Williams; Comm. v. Hector Milette; and District Attorney for the Eastern District v. Superior Court Department of the Trial Court — that came out of Essex County. This was the first SJC decision regarding the Hinton scandal.

The documents for these three cases — including the Essex County DA’s petitions that launched this litigation — can be found here.

The questions reported to the full SJC by Justice Margot Botsford in March 2013 concerned the authorities of the special magistrates appointed to handle the onslaught of appeals filed since Annie Dookhan’s arrest.

The SJC determined that the “magnitude of the allegations of serious and far-reaching misconduct by Dookhan at the Hinton drug lab cannot be overstated,” and that the “exceptional circumstances” at hand allowed judges to stay Dookhan defendants’ sentences pending motions for new trials. The court determined that the special magistrates themselves do not hold power to grant these stays, but the judges to whom they report do.

This case is also notable as an early instance in which the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts urged top courts to use their superintendence powers in light of the still-unknown scale of the scandal, which the SJC would ultimately do in Bridgeman I: