Appeals Court (March 3, 2008)
When a defendant is charged with a school zone violation, the prosecutor need only prove that a school is "accredited" if it is a private preschool or headstart program.
The defendant was convicted by a District Court Judge of distributing a class B substance in a school zone. The "school" in question was a public preschool. The defendant appealed the school zone conviction arguing that for the statute, G.L. c. 94C, ยง 32J, to operate with respect to any preschool there must be evidence that the preschool is accredited, and in this case the evidence of accreditation was insufficient to support a conviction. The appeals court agreed that, based on the witnesses' testimony, there was not enough evidence to support a finding that the school was accredited; however, the school zone statute does not require such proof.
The relevant language reads, "in or on, or within one thousand feet of the real property comprising a public or private accredited preschool, accredited headstart facility, elementary, vocational, or secondary school."
The term "accredited" in the language of the statute acts as a modifier only to private preschools or headstart programs.