Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 211D, § 4 (2026)

Rules and regulations; annual report; training; rotating appointment mechanism

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 4. Said committee shall adopt such rules and regulations as may be necessary for the conduct of its affairs and may from time to time amend or revise the same. The committee shall prepare an annual report which shall be a public document. The committee shall establish standards and guidelines for the training, qualification and removal of counsel in the public and private counsel divisions who accept its appointments, and shall provide pre-service and in-service training for both private counsel who accept assignments and salaried public counsel. The committee may establish a rotating appointment mechanism that will encourage open access among attorneys participating within the private counsel division.

The committee, in consultation with the bureau of substance addiction services within the department of public health, shall provide substance abuse training to attorneys that helps attorneys identify substance abuse treatment resources for persons charged with or convicted of a crime or adjudicated delinquent who could benefit from those resources.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2006–2017 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Drew, 856 N.E.2d 808 (Mass. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Drew, 856 N.E.2d 808 (Mass. 2006). “” The 1999 standards promulgated by CPCS pursuant to G. L. c. 211D, §§ 4 and 9, have no application to appointments made in 1980.”

Deputy Chief Couns. for the Pub. Def. Div. of the Comm. for Pub. Couns. Servs. v. Acting First Just. of the Lowell Div. of the Dist. Court Dep't, 74 N.E.3d 1250 (Mass. 2017). “G. L. c. 211D, § 4. Vested with this authority, CPCS has the ability to insure that indigent defendants have access to effective assistance of counsel.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.