When the defendant admitted to sufficient facts in the jury of six session, the second judge clearly could have chosen to treat the admission as a plea of guilty. See Commonwealth v. Snyder, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 960 (1981); K.B. Smith, Criminal Practice and Procedure § 728 (1970). It is well-established, however, that a guilty plea may not be accepted without an affirmative showing that the defendant acts voluntarily and understands the consequences of his plea.
First, he argues that the motion and trial judges abused their discretion in denying his motions to sever the charges related to victim 3 from the charges related to victims 1 and 2. Prior to trial, the defendant pleaded guilty to the charges relating to victim 3. A guilty plea effectively "waives all but jurisdictional defects." Commonwealth v. Rodriguez , 17 Mass. App. Ct. 547, 556 (1984), quoting from Commonwealth v. Snyder , 12 Mass. App. Ct. 960 (1981). As such, that argument is waived.
. Reid, 420 Mich. 326, 362 N.W.2d 655 (1984); Mont. Code Ann. § 46-12-204(3); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 174.035(3); N.J.R. 3:9-3(f); State v. Hodge, 118 N.M. 410, 882 P.2d 1 (N.M. 1994); N.Y.Crim. P. Law § 710.70; N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15A-979(b); N.D. R.Crim. P. 11(a)(2); Ore.Rev.Stat. 135.335(3); Tenn. R.Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(i); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 44.02 Tex.R.App. P. 25.2(a)(2); Utah R.Crim. P. 11(i); Vt. R.Crim. P. 11(a)(2); W. Va. R.Crim. P. 11(a)(2); Wis. Stat. Ann. § 971.31(10); Wyo. R.Crim. P. 11(a)(2); see also Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2). For jurisdictions that have expressly declined to adopt a conditional plea practice in the absence of an applicable statute or rule, see State v. Arnsberg, 27 Ariz.App. 205, 553 P.2d 238, 240 (Ariz.Ct.App. 1976); Hooten v. State, 212 Ga.App. 770, 442 S.E.2d 836 (1994); People v. Gonzalez, 313 Ill.App.3d 607, 246 Ill.Dec. 509, 730 N.E.2d 534, 545 (2000); State v. Tobin, 333 N.W.2d 842, 844-45 (Iowa 1983); Bruno v. State, 332 Md. 673, 632 A.2d 1192 (1993); Commonwealth v. Snyder, 12 Mass.App.Ct. 960, 427 N.E.2d 500 (Mass. 1981); State v. Lothenbach, 296 N.W.2d 854, 857-58 (Minn. 1980); State v. Parkhurst, 121 N.H. 821, 435 A.2d 522 (1981); Tabor v. Maxwell, 175 Ohio St. 373, 194 N.E.2d 856 (Ohio 1963); Commonwealth v. Bartley, 8 Pa. D C 4th 605, 609 (1991); State v. Soares, 633 A.2d 1356, 1356 (R.I. 1993); State v. Downs, 361 S.C. 141, 604 S.E.2d 377 (S.C. 2004); see also Lineberry v. State, 747 N.E.2d 1151 (Ind.Ct.App. 2001) (vacating a guilty plea entered after the prosecutor and the trial court erroneously assured the defendant that he could appeal the denial of his pretrial motion to suppress, reasoning that those assurances made the guilty plea involuntary).
See Commonwealth v. Stevens, 379 Mass. 772, 776 (1980). In particular, the judge failed to explain to the defendant that he (the judge) would be entitled to treat admissions of sufficient facts as the functional equivalents of pleas of guilty ( Commonwealth v. Duquette, 386 Mass. at 841; Commonwealth v. Snyder, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 960) and that if he should decide to find the defendant guilty (as he subsequently did), the defendant would be precluded from appellate review of any pretrial rulings (such as those in this case) which did not go to the jurisdiction of the court. Garvin v. Commonwealth, 351 Mass. 661, 663, appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 389 U.S. 13 (1967).
"Under the decided cases a guilty plea waives all but jurisdictional defects." Commonwealth v. Snyder, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 960 (1981). See Commonwealth v. Zion, 359 Mass. 559, 563 (1971).