Opinion
11-P-838
01-31-2012
COMMONWEALTH v. WILLIAM F. TAYLOR.
NOTICE: Decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28 are primarily addressed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, rule 1:28 decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28, issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
The defendant appeals after a probation surrender proceeding in the Boston Municipal Court. He complains that the judge abused his discretion in revoking his probation instead of re-probating him. The defendant does not complain here, nor did he below, of insufficiency either in notice or evidence of his violation of the terms of probation. Consequently, there was sufficient evidence for the judge to revoke his probation because a breach of any one of the probation terms constitutes a probation violation and it has not been shown that his discretion to do so was abused. See Commonwealth v. Durling, 407 Mass. 108, 111 (1990) (decision to revoke probation is in the discretion of the judge).
Indeed, the defendant stipulated to sufficient grounds to be found in violation.
We add that although the judge failed to articulate his rationale for revoking the defendant's probation, a shortcoming the defendant raises for the first time on appeal, the omission did not amount to reversible error, even if viewed under a standard of harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt. See Commonwealth v. MacDonald, 53 Mass. App. Ct. 156, 159-160 (2001).
We note that among the violations to which the defendant stipulated were new charges of larceny, forgery, and uttering.
--------
Order revoking probation and imposing sentence affirmed.
By the Court (Kafker, Fecteau & Wolohojian, JJ.),