Documents from the Hinton lab scandal will gradually be added here. If you have additional documents or do not see a document of interest, please get in touch.
Table of Contents- Stacy Foster et al vs. Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al
- Commonwealth v. Jose Martinez
- Commonwealth v. Stephanie Green
- Kevin Bridgeman et al vs. District Attorney for the Suffolk District et al (BRIDGEMAN II)
- Kevin Bridgeman et al vs. District Attorney for the Suffolk District et al (BRIDGEMAN I)
- Commonwealth vs. Rakim D. Scott
- David Meier report
- Commonwealth vs. Charles, Milette & Superior Court
- Massachusetts Inspector General reports
Stacy Foster et al vs. Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al, filed February 2018
In a federal class-action lawsuit, three Dookhan defendants are suing for return of fees, fines, and property they paid or forfeited in the course of their arrest, incarceration, and/or probation in their dismissed cases.Commonwealth v. Jose Martinez, ongoing
In February 2018, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court agreed to hear the case of a man, Jose Martinez, who seeks return of more than $2,000 in fees and fines.Commonwealth v. Stephanie Green, ongoing
In February 2018, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court *sua ponte* transferred from the Appeals Court the case of a woman, Stephanie Green, who seeks return of more than $5,000 in fees and fines, as well as return of more than $1,000 in forfeited cash.Kevin Bridgeman et al vs. District Attorney for the Suffolk District et al (BRIDGEMAN II), decided January 2017
The Supreme Judicial Court's opinion in Bridgeman II is available here.
NOTE: where included, numbers indicate the corresponding entry on the Supreme Judicial Court docket.
Kevin Bridgeman et al vs. District Attorney for the Suffolk District et al (BRIDGEMAN I), decided May 2015
The Supreme Judicial Court's opinion in Bridgeman I is available here. You can watch the January 2015 oral arguments at Suffolk Law School’s SJC video archive here, or download the audio here (.zip).
NOTE: where included, numbers indicate the corresponding entry on the Supreme Judicial Court docket.
Commonwealth vs. Rakim D. Scott, decided March 2014
The Supreme Judicial Court's opinion is available here.
NOTE: where included, numbers indicate the corresponding entry on the Supreme Judicial Court docket.
David Meier report, August 2013
Governor Deval Patrick appointed David Meier, a former prosecutor, in September 2012.
Commonwealth vs. Charles, Milette & Superior Court, decided July 2013
Three cases were combined before the Supreme Judicial Court:
- Commonwealth vs. Shubar Charles: SJC docket here, and Single Justice docket here.
- Commonwealth vs. Hector Milette: SJC docket here, and Single Justice docket here.
- District Attorney for the Eastern District vs. Superior Court Department of the Trial Court: SJC docket here, and Single Justice docket here.
In July 2013, the Mass. Supreme Judicial Court ruled on the above three cases that came out of Essex County. This was the first SJC decision regarding the Hinton scandal.
The questions reported to the full SJC by Justice Margot Botsford 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 pressed for 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. (See the ACLU of MA opposition to the Essex County DA’s petition.)
The SJC's opinion is available here.