Facts: The petitioner, Wolf, was charged
with various ordinance violations, but before the trial date for those
violations he caused five subpoenas duces tecum to be issued. The Commonwealth
moved to quash the subpoenas. A judge allowed this motion. The petitioner filed
his petition, but it was denied by single justice.
Issue: Whether the petitioner has shown that “review
of the trial court decision cannot adequately be obtained on appeal from any
final adverse judgment in the trial court or by other available means.”
No. The petitioner did not make such a showing. He
was incorrect when he argued that the “evidence excluded by totally quashing”
the subpoenas cannot be evaluated on appeal because it will not be a part of
the record and that the matter therefore “becomes unreviewable from a final
trial judgment.” The court has held, in similar circumstances, that a defendant
would be entitled to post-conviction relief if he is able to establish that he
was improperly deprived of a summons directing production of the records; and
that such relief is adequate. Wolf has offered no reason why he would not be
entitled to seek the same type of relief in an appeal from any adverse
judgment. (CH)
