HOWELL v. COMMONWEALTH (2020)

The petitioner, Curtis Howell, appeals from a judgment of a single justice of this court denying his petition pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm.

Howell has been charged in a complaint with assault with a dangerous weapon, in violation of G. L. c. 265, § 15B (b). At the arraignment in the District Court, a judge ordered that Howell be committed to Bridgewater State Hospital pursuant to G. L. c. 123, § 15 (a), for a determination whether he was competent to stand trial. The hospital subsequently filed a petition for civil commitment pursuant to G. L. c. 123, § 16 (b). After Howell had been committed for the initial competency determination, he filed his G. L. c. 211, § 3, petition in the county court alleging various violations of his due process rights, the details of which are not easily discernable from the record before us. He subsequently filed additional papers in the county court raising issues related not to the underlying criminal proceedings but to the competency proceedings. The single justice denied the petition without a hearing.

In his appeal to this court, Howell argues that his substantive and due process rights have been violated and his right to a fair hearing (related, presumably, to the competency determination) and a fair trial (related, presumably, to the underlying criminal proceedings) have been hindered. What he has not done is demonstrate why he is entitled to review pursuant to G. L. c. 211, § 3. Indeed, he has not even addressed the issue. It is in any event clear that he is not entitled to such review where other relief is available to him. There is no reason why his claims of violations of his due process rights cannot adequately be addressed in an appeal from any adverse judgment against him in the criminal proceedings or why his claims stemming from the competency proceedings cannot adequately be addressed in an appeal from a determination in that proceeding.

The single justice did not err or abuse her discretion in denying relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3.

Judgment affirmed.