Commonwealth v. Gibson
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of two counts of indecent assault and battery on a child under fourteen. Defendant was later found to be in violation of his probation. The judge revoked the probation and imposed a term of imprisonment. Defendant engaged in a patter of quarrelsome, confrontational, and hostile conduct toward nine different court-appointed attorneys over the course of the trial and post trial proceeding. On those grounds, the judge ordered the forfeiture of Defendant’s right to counsel. Defendant appealed, arguing that the judge erred in the forfeiture order and the probation revocation hearing. The Appeals Court affirmed. The Supreme Judicial Court vacated the forfeiture order, holding (1) the forfeiture hearing did not meet the procedural due process requirements articulated in Commonwealth v. Means; and (2) Defendant’s conduct was not sufficiently egregious to warrant forfeiture under the guidelines established in Means.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.