Opinion
SJC-13462
09-21-2023
Deyquoine MITCHELL v. COMMONWEALTH.
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law. Darren T. Griffis & Sarah Varney, for the petitioner.
The case was submitted on the papers filed, accompanied by a memorandum of law.
Darren T. Griffis & Sarah Varney, for the petitioner.
RESCRIPT
Deyquoine Mitchell appeals from a judgment of the county court denying, without a hearing, his petition for extraordinary relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3. We affirm. Mitchell has been charged with possession of a large capacity firearm and possession of a class D substance with intent to distribute. He filed a motion for discovery of evidence related to police practices. A judge in the Superior Court denied the motion. Mitchell's petition sought relief from that ruling.
Mitchell has filed a memorandum and appendix pursuant to S.J.C. Rule 2:21, as amended, 434 Mass. 1301 (2001), which requires him to "set forth the reasons why review of the trial court decision cannot adequately be obtained on appeal from any final adverse judgment in the trial court or by other available means." He has not done so. "If [Mitchell] is convicted of any offense, he will have the opportunity to raise his issues in the ordinary appellate process." Martinez v. Commonwealth, 475 Mass. 1001, 1001, 54 N.E.3d 1088 (2016). "[W]e have repeatedly stated that ‘[d]iscovery matters such as this are routinely addressed on direct appeal.’ " Pinney v. Commonwealth, 487 Mass. 1029, 1030, 170 N.E.3d 285 (2021), quoting Martinez, supra. The single justice neither erred nor abused her discretion by denying relief under G. L. c. 211, § 3.
Judgment affirmed.