Mass. Gen. Laws » Part III Title IV Chapter 258D
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1 (2026)

Erroneous felony conviction claims; class of eligible persons; burden of proof; definitions; right to jury trial; preliminary relief

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 1. (A) A claim may be brought against the commonwealth for an erroneous felony conviction resulting in incarceration as provided in this chapter.

(B) The class of persons eligible to obtain relief under this chapter shall be limited to the following:—

(i) those that have been granted a full pardon pursuant to section 152 of chapter 127, if the governor expressly states in writing his belief in the individual's innocence, or

(ii) those who have been granted judicial relief by a state court of competent jurisdiction, on grounds which tend to establish the innocence of the individual as set forth in clause (vi) of subsection (C), and if (a) the judicial relief vacates or reverses the judgment of a felony conviction, and the felony indictment or complaint used to charge the individual with such felony has been dismissed, or if a new trial was ordered, the individual was not retried and the felony indictment or complaint was dismissed or a nolle prosequi was entered, or if a new trial was ordered the individual was found not guilty at the new trial; and (b) at the time of the filing of an action under this chapter no criminal proceeding is pending or can be brought against the individual by a district attorney or the attorney general for any act associated with such felony conviction.

(C) In order for an individual to prevail and recover damages against the commonwealth in a cause of action brought under this chapter, the individual must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that:—

(i) he is a member of the class of persons defined in subsection (B);

(ii) he was convicted of an offense classified as a felony;

(iii) he did not plead guilty to the offense charged, or to any lesser included offense, unless such guilty plea was withdrawn, vacated or nullified by operation of law on a basis other than a claimed deficiency in the plea warnings required by section 29D of chapter 278;

(iv) he was sentenced to incarceration for not less than 1 year in state prison or a house of correction as a result of the conviction and has served all or any part of such sentence;

(v) he was incarcerated solely on the basis of the conviction for the offense that is the subject of the claim;

(vi) he did not commit the crimes or crime charged in the indictment or complaint or any other felony arising out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony; and

(vii) to the extent that he is guilty of conduct that would have justified a conviction of any lesser included misdemeanor arising out of or reasonably connected to facts supporting the indictment or complaint, that he has served the maximum sentence he would have received for such lesser included misdemeanor and not less than one additional year in a prison.

(D) The claimant shall attach to his claim certified copies of: the mittimus that shows the claimant's sentence to incarceration and; the warrants necessary to grant a pardon pursuant to section 152 of chapter 127 or; criminal case docket entries or documents related thereto in the case of judicial relief.

(E) For the purposes of this chapter ''conviction'' or ''convicted'' shall include an adjudication as a youthful offender, if such adjudication resulted in the youthful offender's incarceration in a house of correction or state prison.

(F) The commonwealth and any individual filing an action for compensation under this chapter shall have the right to a jury trial on any action so filed. In the interest of doing substantial justice, with regard to weight and admissibility of evidence submitted by the claimant or the commonwealth, the court presiding at a jury-waived trial shall exercise its discretion by giving due consideration to any difficulties of proof caused by the passage of time, the death or unavailability or witnesses, or other factors not caused by the claimant, or those acting on the claimant's or the commonwealth's behalf. At a jury trial, the court shall consider these same factors as part of the exercise of its discretion when determining the admissibility and weight of evidence, and the court shall instruct the jury that it may consider the same factors when it weighs the evidence presented at trial. No evidence proffered by any party shall be excluded on grounds that it was seized or obtained in violation of the Fourth, Fifth or Sixth amendments to the Constitution of the United States, or in violation of Articles 12 or 14 of Part the First of the Constitution of Massachusetts.

(G) A claimant shall be entitled to preliminary relief under section subsection (E) of section 5 upon an initial showing that there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of the case.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2004–2024 · leading case: Irwin v. Commonwealth, 992 N.E.2d 275 (Mass. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Irwin v. Commonwealth, 992 N.E.2d 275 (Mass. 2013). · cites it 17× “1 We consider also whether a conviction that was overturned because the Commonwealth introduced evidence of the plaintiff’s prearrest silence as purportedly establishing consciousness of guilt was overturned “on grounds which tend to establish” his innocence, such that he is…”
Drumgold v. Commonwealth, 937 N.E.2d 450 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 22× “" G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (B) (ii). A judge in the Superior Court denied the Commonwealth's motion.”
Guzman v. Commonwealth, 937 N.E.2d 441 (Mass. 2010). · cites it 8× “Relevant here are certain subsections of G. L. c. 258D, § 1. General Laws c. 258D, § 1 (A), authorizes certain claims to be brought against the Commonwealth, thereby waiving the Commonwealth’s sovereign immunity as to such claims.”
Guzman v. Commonwealth, 907 N.E.2d 1140 (Mass. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 6× “G. L. c. 258D, §§ 1, 5, & 7. 3 Relevant here are certain subsections of G.”
Renaud v. Commonwealth, 28 N.E.3d 478 (Mass. 2015). · cites it 5× “We transferred the case here on our own initiative to determine whether, under G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (B), the reversal of Renaud’s convictions due to insufficient evidence amounts to “grounds which tend to establish” his innocence, thus rendering him eligible to obtain relief under…”
Drumgold v. Callahan, 707 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “2d at 452 ; see Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1. As the SJC's decision made clear, the combination of the various grounds offered in the new trial motion, and particularly the allegations regarding Alexander, were very serious.”
Limone v. United States, 579 F.3d 79 (1st Cir. 2009). “§§ 1495 , 2513(e) (limiting government’s liability for wrongful incarceration of federal prisoners to $50,000 per year, or to $100,000 per year in capital cases); Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, §§ 1, 5 (capping state’s liability at $500,000 per incident).”
Santana v. Commonwealth, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 372 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 12× “…out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony.” G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (C)(vi).”
Commonwealth v. Martin, 63 N.E.3d 1107 (Mass. 2016). “Contrast G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (B) (ii) (eligible defendants include “those who have been granted judicial relief by a state court of competent jurisdiction”).”
Paul Kamienski Vs. State of New Jersey, Departmentof Treasury(l-2106-10, Mercer Cnty. & Statewide), 169 A.3d 493 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017). “Other states have required the claimant to provide proof of innocence of "any other felony arising out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony," Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(C)(vi) (2017); "another criminal…”
Santana v. Commonwealth, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 553 (Mass. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 3× “" G. L. c. 258D, § 1(B)(ii), inserted by St.”
State of Iowa v. David R. Desimone, 839 N.W.2d 660 (Iowa 2013). “2013); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 258D, § 1(B)(ii) (West Supp.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(A) — 1 case
Guzman v. Commonwealth, 907 N.E.2d 1140 (Mass. App. Ct. 2009). “G. L. c. 258D, §§ 1, 5, & 7. 3 Relevant here are certain subsections of G.”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(B) — 2 cases
Guzman v. Commonwealth, 907 N.E.2d 1140 (Mass. App. Ct. 2009). “G. L. c. 258D, §§ 1, 5, & 7. 3 Relevant here are certain subsections of G.”
Riley v. Commonwealth, 971 N.E.2d 843 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(B)(ii) — 4 cases
Santana v. Commonwealth, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 372 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). “…out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony.” G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (C)(vi).”
Santana v. Commonwealth, 88 Mass. App. Ct. 553 (Mass. App. Ct. 2015). “" G. L. c. 258D, § 1(B)(ii), inserted by St.”
State of Iowa v. David R. Desimone, 839 N.W.2d 660 (Iowa 2013). “2013); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 258D, § 1(B)(ii) (West Supp.”
Guy Israel Greene v. State of Minnesota (Minn. Ct. App. 2015).
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(C)(vi) — 2 cases
Paul Kamienski Vs. State of New Jersey, Departmentof Treasury(l-2106-10, Mercer Cnty. & Statewide), 169 A.3d 493 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017). “Other states have required the claimant to provide proof of innocence of "any other felony arising out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony," Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(C)(vi) (2017); "another criminal…”
Santana v. Commonwealth, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 372 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016). “…out of or reasonably connected to the facts supporting the indictment or complaint, or any lesser included felony.” G. L. c. 258D, § 1 (C)(vi).”
— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 258D, § 1(F) — 1 case
Riley v. Commonwealth, 971 N.E.2d 843 (Mass. App. Ct. 2012).
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.