Court Case Record COMMONWEALTH vs. ANGEL CRUZ 2012-J-0444 UID(09f7)


Court Case Number: 2012-J-0444

Case Number2012-J-0444
Case TypeCriminal
StateMassachusetts, MA
CourtBristol Superior Court
Court Address
Field Date12/03/2012
Close Date01/16/2013


David B. Mark, EsquireCommonwealthPlaintiff/Respondent
David J. Rotondo, EsquireAngel CruzDefendant/Petitioner
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
12/03/2012 #1 Motion to waive entry fee, filed by Angel Cruz, is allowed.
12/03/2012 #2 Motion to file late notice of appeal, filed by Angel Cruz.
12/14/2012 #3 ORDER: Pursuant to Mass.R.A.P. 14(b), defendant Angel Kruz through appointed counsel has moved for enlargement of time for submission of his notice of appeal. A judgment of conviction entered on or about January 24, 2012. Consequently, the present motion falls within the limitation of one year set by rule 14(b). Counsel reports that the tardiness has resulted from "reasons unknown." The motion does not present any certification of service upon the Commonwealth. Accordingly, the court hereby orders appointed counsel for the defendant to serve notice of the present motion upon the office of the District Attorney by close of December 21. The Commonwealth shall file its response with this court by close of December 31. (Sikora, J.). *Notice/Attest/Kane, J.
01/08/2013 #4 Opposition to motion to extend time for filing notice of appeal, filed by Commonwealth. ^
01/16/2013 #5 ORDER: Upon Defendant's Motion to Extend Time for Filing Notice of Appeal. Upon consideration of defendant Angel Cruz's motion to extend time for filing notice of appeal pursuant to Mass.R.A.P. 14(b) and of the Commonwealth's opposition, I hereby DENY the motion. REASONING The defendant filed his motion approximately ten months beyond the deadline for submission of a timely notice of appeal. By neither memorandum nor affidavit has he shown the required "good cause" for such a lengthy delay. In particular, he has not met the standard of Commonwealth v. Trussell, 68 Mass. App. Ct. 452, 459 (2007): that the untimeliness of the appeal resulted from an act or omission of counsel to which the defendant did not knowingly assent. Finally, the circumstances of the defendant's incarceration indicate that he is presently serving twenty-four to twenty-five years by reason of a plea of guilty to the charge of aggravated rape; and that he serving three separate concurrent sentences of three to five years upon charges arising from the same incident to which he submitted pleas of guilt. He is not appealing from the judgment resulting from any of those pleas. His present attempted appeal would challenge two concurrent sentences of two to three years, each, resulting from jury verdicts of guilt upon an entirely separate incident. The sentences subject to the present attempted appeal constitutes small and lesser included spans of time within the larger and undisputed periods of incarceration. That circumstance indicates (1) that the defendant had, and has, little motive to submit a timely appeal and probably did not do so consciously; and (2) that the preclusion of his requested untimely appeal imposes no meaningful consequence upon him. (Sikora, J.) *Notice/Attest/Kane, J.