Several news outlets have written articles about Attorney Post’s work, along with ACLU technologist Paola Villareal, in identifying defendants who were convicted of drug offenses without the Commonwealth ever notifying them that the substances in their cases tested negative for drugs. Articles in the Boston Globe, CommonWealth Magazine, and MassLive.com detailed efforts to vindicate 64 individuals wrongly convicted of 91 drug offenses. We are pleased to report that, in the wake of these revelations, several additional District Attorney’s offices have reached out to indicate their interest in helping correct the 278 additional wrongful convictions outside of Suffolk County that Attorney Post helped identify.
Attorney Post's Work Results In Dismissal of 91 Convictions for 64 Defendants
Wood & Nathanson is pleased to announce that, as a result of relentless, detailed work by Attorney Christopher Post, the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office is moving to vacate and dismiss ninety-one additional drug convictions in sixty-four defendants’ cases that were tainted by the ever-growing Hinton Drug Lab scandal. In these cases, each of the defendants pleaded guilty to at least one drug offense despite the fact that laboratory testing subsequently proved that substances in question were not drugs at all. We are thankful that DA Rollins and the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office chose to work proactively with Attorney Post to achieve a just result.
COVID-19 Emergency Petition
On behalf of MACDL, Attorney Wood was part of a team that filed an emergency petition with the Supreme Judicial Court on March 24, 2020. Together with lawyers from CPCS and the ACLU, the petition asks the SJC to take immediate steps in light of the COVID-19 pandemic to reduce prison and jail populations to protect the health and lives of our clients, as well as correctional staff and the public. Read the petition here.
Amicus Brief: Racist Pretextual Stops and Distracted Driving Law
Attorney Wood was proud to be part of a team arguing that the Supreme Judicial Court should abandon its cases allowing for pretextual stops and restricting how defendants can prove that a particular stop was racially discriminatory. The amicus brief goes on to point out that the Commonwealth’s new “Distracted Driving” hands-free law limits data collection on stops by individual officers, making it essentially impossible to ever prove a claim of discrimination. The Court should replace the current test with a test that asks whether a driver would have normally been stopped for the violation without a pretext. If not, then the prosecution has the burden to prove that the stop was not discriminatory. This amazing team was made up of Oren Nimni for the Lawyers for Committee for Civil Rights, Katharine Naples-Mitchell for the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race & Justice, Chauncey Wood for the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and Radha Natarajan for the New England Innocence Project.
Eva Jellison Named to Lawyer's Weekly Up & Coming 2020
We’re excited to announce that Wood & Nathanson partner Eva Jellison has been named to Massachusetts Lawyer’s Weekly Excellence in the Law Up & Coming Lawyers 2020. Attorney Jellison’s relentless work on behalf of criminal justice-involved juveniles and adults produced results numerous times over the past year alone, including wins retroactively abolishing the offense of disturbing a school, reducing a “habitual offender” client's sentence by ten years, and retroactively abolishing the prosecution of eleven year-old children. We can’t wait to see what she’ll accomplish in 2020!
Souza Baranowski Lawsuit Regarding Retaliation Against Prisoners
Wood & Nathanson is extremely concerned about reports that Massachusetts Department of Correction employees have engaged in retaliation against and collect punishment of men imprisoned at SBCC, particularly those who had no role in a recent assault on prison guards. We are helping to fight back. Disturbing reports, including from one of our own clients, describe a terrifying situation in which guards are assaulting people and threatening them. Making the situation worse, DOC excluded attorneys for nearly two weeks and continues to limit attorney access. We are extremely grateful for the work of MACDL president Victoria Kelliher, CPCS Attorney Rebecca Jacobstein and others in filing a lawsuit against the DOC challenging their actions, including actions against Attorney Wood’s client and limitations on Attorney Wood’s access to him.
Striking Two Blows for Freedom against Stop & Frisk and Impoundment Searches
In the past week, Wood & Nathanson has helped strike two significant blows for freedom in cases involving police arrests and searches of motorists. Wood & Nathanson alumna Attorney Claire Ward convinced the Supreme Judicial Court to rule that the police must have reasonable suspicion that a suspect is both armed and dangerous before pat frisking them. Also, Attorney Wood and a team of ACLU lawyers drafted an amicus brief that helped convince the SJC to rule for the first time that police cannot routinely impound and search the car of an arrested motorist when a sober, qualified driver is available to take possession of the car.
Dismissal and Sealing of Felony Charge Against Graduate Student
In December 2019, Attorney Wood secured the dismissal of a felony criminal charge against an MIT graduate student just three months after the client had been charged, and then convinced the court to grant his motion to seal the matter immediately (a process that normally takes about a year), preventing potential employers from learning that the client had ever been charged.
Quick, Successful Defense Avoids Expulsion, Criminal Complaint
In November 2019, Attorney Wood represented a Northeastern University student in a university disciplinary proceeding, based on misconduct allegedly witnessed by university police. Moving very quickly because of an abbreviated timeframe, Attorney Wood prepared a defense that convinced the the Northeastern Student Conduct Board (SCB) not to expel the client. Instead, the SCB allowed the client to finish the semester, and provided a path to allow him to graduate on schedule with his classmates. Attorney Wood also convinced the Northeastern University Police Department not to refer the matter to the municipal criminal court.
Quick Action Avoids University Discipline and Criminal Complaint
Successful Title IX Defense Enables Client to Graduate
In early 2019, Attorneys Wood & Jellison represented a student at a local college who was accused of Title IX violations. After an extensive investigation of thousands of pages of evidence, and a multi-week investigation by the Title IX investigator, Attorneys Wood and Jellison helped their client prove to the Title IX investigator that the complainant had not been truthful in describing the events. Moreover, Attorneys Wood and Jellison helped their client convince the head of the Title IX office not to expel him. Instead, she allowed the client to finish the semester, and provided a path to allow him to graduate.
Important Amicus Brief Regarding Police Stops
Today, the SJC heard argument in Commonwealth v. Tykorie Evelyn, an important case regarding police stops in so-called “high crime” areas where residents may seek to avoid contact with the police out of nervousness or fear, not consciousness of guilt. As co-chair of the MACDL Amicus Committee, Attorney Wood was proud to help pull together and assist a great team from Foley Hoag consisting of Anthony Mirenda, Neil Austin, Rachel Hutchinson, and Ned Melanson. Their brief powerfully argues, among other things, that nervousness or lack of engagement by a black teenager during a police encounter is not indicative of criminality. You can read the brief here.
Disturbing a School Abolished Retroactively
On October 29, 2019, Attorney Jellison convinced the Supreme Judicial Court to give retroactive effect to the legislature’s abolition of the offense of “disturbing a school,” including cases that were filed and pending at the time the legislature repealed the offense. Building on Attorney Jellison’s successful advocacy in Lazlo L. v. Commonwealth, the Court held in Commonwealth v. Ashe A. that allowing those cases to still be prosecuted would be “repugnant” to the legislature’s purpose of juvenile justice reform. This offense was a major driver of the school to prison pipeline. Society needs to stop criminalizing children for behaving like children.
Melissa Ramos and Caroline Alpert Join Wood & Nathanson
We are excited to announce that Attorney Melissa Ramos and Attorney Caroline Alpert have joined Wood & Nathanson, LLP. They bring a diverse set of skills to the firm, allowing us to advocate for and protect our clients in multiple areas. Attorney Ramos practices in criminal courts, handling both trial matters and appeals, as well as university discipline (Title IX) proceedings. Attorney Alpert is an experienced advocate for juveniles and youthful offenders in trial and appellate courts as well as school disciplinary proceedings. We cannot wait to see what we can accomplish together!
Life Without Parole Sentence Reduced
On November 8, Attorney Nathanson convinced the Supreme Judicial Court to reduce his client’s sentence of first degree murder to second degree murder. He had been sentenced to life without parole, but Attorney Nathanson uncovered a series of childhood brain injuries impacting the client’s mental state. Because of this decision, the client will be eligible for parole.
Attorney Jellison Made Partner
Wood & Nathanson is proud to announce that Eva Jellison has been made a partner in the firm. Attorney Jellison’s work on the cutting edge of juvenile and appellate defense includes advocacy for the adoption of a “reasonable juvenile” standard for evaluation of juveniles’ mental states, retroactive application of juvenile justice reforms, and access to post-conviction DNA testing.
University Discipline, Criminal Charges Avoided
Amicus Brief: Indigent Defense Crisis
Today, Attorney Wood and a team of lawyers filed an amicus brief on behalf of MACDL, Hampden Lawyers for Justice and the ACLU in Carrasquillo v. Hampden County District Court, an appeal pending before the SJC and scheduled to be argued in November.
In this case, CPCS is challenging the order of the Hampden County District Court requiring Hampden County staff public defenders to accept all appointments in the Springfield District Court for which bar advocates could not be found. The appeal is a vehicle to discuss the growing shortage of bar advocates across the Commonwealth. Like CPCS, MACDL et al. assert that the source of the problem is the Legislature's failure to increase rates paid to bar advocates over the past 15 years since the SJC instructed the Legislature to address this issue in its 2005 decision, Lavallee. Unlike CPCS, MACDL et al. urge the Court to increase rates on its own authority. Because the legislature has failed to act and that failure is now causing a breakdown in the criminal justice system, MACDL et al. argue that the only solution to this constitutional crisis is an increase in rates paid to bar advocates and the SJC has the authority to order this increase effective immediately.
The legal team is:
- Chauncey Wood: MACDL amicus director
- Matt Segal: ACLUM Legal Director
- Jessica Lewis: ACLUM staff attorney
- Robert McDonnell: Partner, Morgan Lewis
- Timothy Burke:- Partner, Morgan Lewis
- Matthew Bohenek: associate, Morgan Lewis
- David Hoose: Hampden President, Lawyers for Justice
Amicus Brief: Right to Alternative to Police Impounding Your Vehicle
On October 17, Attorney Wood co-authored an amicus brief on behalf MACDL and the ACLU in a Fourth Amendment case. The brief argues that police must notify people that they may propose an alternative to impoundment of their vehicle before the police may impound it. This is critical because impoundment inevitably leads to an invasive inventory search and because impoundment is an unreasonable financial burden on poor people if there is reasonable alternative to impoundment.
Amicus Brief: Defendant Has Right to Know His Attorney Was Not Appointed, Not Paid
On October 15, Attorney Wood filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Judicial Court on behalf of the Cato Institute in Commonwealth v. Francis. In this case, trial counsel volunteered to serve as Mr. Francis's pro bono counsel without telling Mr. Francis that he was not being paid because the trial judge refused to appoint trial counsel as not qualified to handle murder cases. We argue that depriving Mr. Francis of this crucial information was a violation the right to choice of counsel and resulted in structural error requiring automatic reversal.