{"id":1153,"date":"2016-12-05T12:00:13","date_gmt":"2016-12-05T17:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.massachusettscriminaldefenselawyerblog.com\/?p=1153"},"modified":"2016-12-05T12:00:13","modified_gmt":"2016-12-05T17:00:13","slug":"sjc-decide-whether-valor-act-permits-dismissal-massachusetts-oui-offense-prosecutors-objection","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.delsignoredefense.com\/blog\/sjc-decide-whether-valor-act-permits-dismissal-massachusetts-oui-offense-prosecutors-objection\/","title":{"rendered":"SJC to decide whether Valor Act permits dismissal of Massachusetts OUI offense over the Prosecutor’s objection"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court will hear oral argument tomorrow on the issue of whether the Valor Act permits a dismissal of an OUI charge over the prosecutor\u2019s objection. \u00a0The case that raised this issue is Commonwealth v. Joel Morgan, which was originally \u00a0charged out of the Lowell District Court.<\/p>\n

The Valor Act allows for pretrial diversion of any individual who has served in the military and has been in at least one day of actual combat. To qualify for a diversion under the Valor Act, the individual most not have any prior record and must get a recommendation from a treatment provider that they would benefit from the treatment. \u00a0The diversion is available for any type of criminal charge but has come up must recently regarding OUI offenses. \u00a0The Morgan raises two questions both in the context of a second offense; however, the Court’s reasoning is likely to apply to a first offense.<\/p>\n