Court Case Record COMMONWEALTH vs. CARLOS RAMIREZ 2012-P-0123


Court Case Number: 2012-P-0123

Case Number2012-P-0123
Case TypeCriminal
StateMassachusetts, MA
CountyChelsea District, SU
CourtChelsea District, SU
Court Address
Field Date04/29/2002
Close Date07/10/2012


John P. Zanini, A.D.A. Inactive Vincent J. DeMore, A.D.A.CommonwealthPlaintiff/Appellant
Jeffrey B. Rubin, Esquire WithdrawnCarlos RamirezPro Se Defendant/Appellee
Entry Date Paper Entry Text
01/27/2012 #1 Transcripts received: NONE
01/27/2012 #2 Entered.
01/27/2012 #3 Notice of entry sent.
01/31/2012 #4 Notice of appearance of Vincent J. DeMore, III for Commonwealth.
01/31/2012 #5 Docketing Statement received from Commonwealth.
02/01/2012 #6 SERVICE of brief (8) for Plaintiff/Appellant Commonwealth.
03/01/2012 #7 Motion to hold in abeyance and Attorney Jeffrey B. Rubin's request to withdraw, filed by Carlos Ramirez.
03/06/2012 #8 RE#6: The motion to withdraw is denied without prejudice to renewal accompanied by a certificate of service showing service of the motion on the appellant at his last known address. Counsel will be permitted to withdraw at such time and the appellant will be deemed pro se. The motion to stay the appeal is denied. *Notice.
03/19/2012 #9 RENEWED MOTION to withdraw as counsel for Carlos Ramirez, filed by Jeffrey B. Rubin. ^
03/21/2012 RE#7: Allowed. The defendant is deemed pro se in this appeal. Notice
04/17/2012 Motion to schedule argument, filed by Commonwealth.
04/25/2012 RE#8: The matter will be placed under consideration by a panel. *Notice.
06/28/2012 Under consideration by Panel. (Vuono, J., Smith, J., Carhart, J.).
07/10/2012 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Commonwealth appeals from an order allowing the defendant's motion for a new trial. Because we conclude that the appeal is moot, we dismiss the appeal. Background. On May 23, 2002, the defendant pleaded guilty to trespass and disorderly conduct, and admitted to sufficient facts for findings of guilty of resisting arrest and possession of a class B substance. The charges of resisting arrest and possession of a class B substance were continued without a finding, and the defendant was placed on probation until April 30, 2003. On March 25, 2003, the United States Immigration Court served the defendant with a notice to appear, alleging that he was subject to deportation for his conviction of possession of a class B substance. On June 29, 2011, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial, seeking to withdraw his plea on the basis that (1) he was not given immigration warnings pursuant to G. L. c. 278, ยง 29D; and (2) he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The judge allowed the defendant's motion, and the Commonwealth appealed. The defendant has since been deported. Discussion. We need not address the propriety of the judge's ruling because the defendant has been deported. As such, the Commonwealth's appeal is moot. See Commonwealth v. Pena, 462 Mass. 183, 186 (2012), quoting from Murphy v. Hunt, 455 U.S. 478, 481 (1982) (quotations omitted) ("Generally speaking, a case becomes moot when the issues presented are no longer 'live' or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome"). Appeal dismissed. (Vuono, Smith & Carhart, JJ.) *Notice/Attest.