Commonwealth v. Carrara

After the defendant was found incompetent to stand trial on criminal charges arising out of his use of an automobile, he was committed to Taunton State Hospital (the hospital).1 The commitment order provided that the defendant “be restricted in his . . . movement to the buildings and grounds of said facility.” Upon the expiration of the initial com*87mitment order, the defendant was recommitted to the hospital pursuant to G. L. c. 123, § 16(c). However, the recommitment order contained the provision that whenever the defendant was outside the buildings and on the grounds, he was to be escorted…