Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 53 (2026)

Penalty for certain offenses

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 53. (a) Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female, persons who with offensive and disorderly acts or language accost or annoy another person, lewd, wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, keepers of noisy and disorderly houses, and persons guilty of indecent exposure shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than 6 months, or by a fine of not more than $200, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

(b) Disorderly persons and disturbers of the peace shall, for a first offense, be punished by a fine of not more than $150. For a second or subsequent offense, disorderly persons and disturbers of the peace shall be punished by imprisonment in a jail or house of correction for not more than 6 months or by a fine of not more than $200 or by both such fine and imprisonment; provided, however, that an elementary or secondary school student shall not be adjudged a delinquent child for a violation of this subsection for such conduct within school buildings or on school grounds or in the course of school-related events.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 239 cases (34 in the last 5 years), 1924–2025 · leading case: Commonwealth v. King, 372 N.E.2d 196 (Mass. 1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. King, 372 N.E.2d 196 (Mass. 1977). · cites it 20× “The defendants, Rebecca Jones, Barbara Astrofsky, and Diane King, all were convicted for violations of G.L.c. 272, § 53. Jones and Astrofsky were convicted in a Municipal Court, appealed, and then were tried and convicted by a judge in the *7 Superior Court on complaints of…”

Wilber v. Curtis, 872 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “The defendants contended that Wilber’s Fourth Amendment right had not been violated because they had probable cause to arrest Wilber for having committed any of four separate state law offenses—disorderly conduct, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272 § 53 (2015); disturbing the peace, id.”

Commonwealth v. Quinn, 789 N.E.2d 138 (Mass. 2003). · cites it 10× “” After receiving Miranda warnings, the defendant stated, “You stupid mother fucker you don’t have indecent exposure. I didn’t pull my prick out.”

Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 15 N.E.3d 690 (Mass. 2014). · cites it 13× “274, § 6, and of accosting or annoying a person of the opposite sex, G. L. c. 272, § 53. 2 He was sentenced to from three to five years in the State prison on his conviction of attempted kidnapping, and he was sentenced to three years’ probation on his conviction of accosting or…”

Commonwealth v. Dotson, 966 N.E.2d 811 (Mass. 2012). · cites it 13× “On September 5, 2008, a criminal complaint issued against the defendant in the Dorchester Divi *97 sion of the Boston Municipal Court Department, charging her with one count of disorderly conduct, G. L. c. 272, § 53, and one count of assault on a police officer, G.”

Commonwealth v. Sholley, 739 N.E.2d 236 (Mass. 2000). · cites it 7× “275, § 2), being a disorderly person (G. L. c. 272, § 53), and disrupting court proceedings (G.”

Commonwealth v. Ramirez, 865 N.E.2d 1158 (Mass. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 11× “6, § 178H, and accosted or annoyed a person of the opposite sex, G. L. c. 272, § 53. We conclude that there was insufficient evidence to support the defendant’s convictions, and we reverse.”

Commonwealth v. Maguire, 65 N.E.3d 1160 (Mass. 2017). · cites it 5× “It is established that proof of the fourth and fifth elements — both of which require “shock” or “alarm” — is what distinguishes “open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior,” which is a felony, from the “closely similar” misdemeanor of indecent exposure under G. L. c. 272,…”

Commonwealth v. Templeman, 381 N.E.2d 1300 (Mass. 1978). · cites it 10× “" To avoid the defendant's claim that the statute is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad, we attempt to make it constitutionally definite by giving it a reasonable construction.”

Nolan v. Krajcik, 384 F. Supp. 2d 447 (D. Mass. 2005). · cites it 9× “In *455 his report, Krajcik described Nolan’s behavior as that of a disorderly person pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 53 . (Id.). Specifically, Krajeik’s report reads, among other things, that Nolan became a disorderly person (MGL 272/53) when he began challenging people…”

Commonwealth v. Blackmer, 932 N.E.2d 301 (Mass. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 6× “272, § 16, and one count of being lewd, wanton, and lascivious in behavior, G. L. c. 272, § 53, for an incident that occurred on the Smith College campus.”

Commonwealth v. Chou, 741 N.E.2d 17 (Mass. 2001). · cites it 3× “G. L. c. 272, § 53. 1 On appeal he claims that the judge improperly denied his motion for a required finding of not guilty, arguing that (1) his language and conduct were not “disorderly”; (2) as applied, the annoying or accosting provision of § 53 criminalizes his speech in…”

Show all 239 citing cases →

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 53(a) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Vick, 90 Mass. App. Ct. 622 (Mass. App. Ct. 2016).

— Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 272, § 53(b) — 1 case

Waterman v. City of Taunton (D. Mass. 2024).

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.