The defendant appealed, and the judgments of conviction were affirmed by a different panel of this court in an unpublished memorandum and order. See Commonwealth v. Zinser, 51 Mass.App.Ct. 1105 (2001). In February 2021, after a lengthy term of incarceration (twenty-three years), the defendant was released from prison and began to serve a ten-year term of probation. Approximately six months later, on August 2, 2021, he was indicted by a grand jury and charged with two counts of criminal harassment, subsequent offense, in violation of G. L. c. 265, ยง 43A. On the basis of the new charges, the probation department issued a notice of surrender, alleging that the defendant had violated the condition of his probation requiring him to "obey local, state, and federal laws, and court orders."
In 1998, Lawrence Zinser was convicted of armed assault with intent to kill, assault and battery by means of a dangerous, weapon, and malicious destruction of property (two indictments). After his convictions were affirmed on appeal, see Commonwealth v. Zinser, 51 Mass. App. Ct. 1105 (2001), Zinser moved for a new trial pursuant to Mass. R. Crim. P. 30 (b), as appearing in 435 Mass. 1501 (2001), on the ground that his trial counsel had provided ineffective assistance in failing to investigate adequately the possibility that Zinser suffered from a mental illness or impairment at the time of the offenses. The motion judge declined either to hold a hearing or to act on Zinser's motion (effectively denying it), on the supposition that the motion "raise[d] no issue which could not have been raised in his direct appeal from his convictions."
On direct appeal, the defendant's argument that he was overcharged was rejected. See Commonwealth v. Zinser, 51 Mass. App. Ct. 1105 (2001). He is therefore precluded from raising the issue again.
In 2001, this court affirmed the defendant's convictions in an unpublished decision issued pursuant to our rule 1:28. See Commonwealth v. Zinser, 51 Mass.App.Ct. 1105 (2001). In 2004, the defendant moved for a new trial, alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to adequately investigate a mental health defense.