DRUG LAB MISCONDUCT COULD COST BAY STATE
SJC to decide if defendants get money back
Scandals at Bay State drug labs will eventually lead to the dismissal of more than 30,000 cases — each one carrying court costs that coincide with being pulled into the criminal justice system. And now the Supreme Judicial Court will decide whether those defendants should get their money back.
Jose Martinez had his drug convictions vacated and dismissed on the heels of the disastrous Annie Dookhan drug lab scandal. Last summer he went in front of Judge Stephen Abany and asked the state to give him back the nearly $3,000 he paid in court fees, according to court documents.
Abany found that the question “could have a significant impact on the commonwealth” and asked the Appeals Court to weigh in.
The SJC decided earlier this month that it would hear the case instead.
“If the payment of money was dependent on a criminal conviction, and the conviction is then gone and the prosecution is over, you are legally presumed innocent,” said Benjamin H. Keehn, the public defender representing Martinez. “You should be as close to the position as you would have been if you weren’t convicted in the first place.”
If the SJC rules in Martinez’s favor, the state could be on the hook for an untold fortune. A broad ruling could allow every defendant affected by the Dookhan and Sonja Farak lab scandals to go to court and ask for the money they paid as a consequence of their now-vacated convictions.
It could go even further.
“It could effect more than Dookhan or Farak defendants,” Keehn said. “It could apply to anyone who was convicted, and on appeal it was determined that the evidence against them was legally insufficient. That person should also be entitled to the fees they paid.”
Keehn relies on Nelson v. Colorado, a recent Supreme Court decision declaring that when “a criminal conviction is invalidated” and “no retrial will occur” a state is obligated to refund fees and court costs “exacted from the defendant upon, and as a consequence of, the conviction.”
“Our position is that under this case, the money they paid as a consequence of their convictions is owed to them,” said Matthew Segal, legal director of the ACLU of Massachusetts. “These are people who were punished quite severely for wrongful convictions.”
Essex prosecutors, who were involved in Martinez’s underlying case, have withdrawn from the appeal, saying it’s Attorney General Maura Healey’s responsibility. Healey’s office is aware of the case but has not yet filed opposing briefs.
Keehn acknowledges that a ruling in his client’s favor could cost the state a lot of money, but he said it is the failures within the system that have led to this point.
“This is money being returned,” he said. “This isn’t an award.”