Code of Massachusetts Regulations 809 CMR - BUREAU OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS (THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO REGULATIONS)
MASSACHUSETTS CODE OF REGULATIONS – 809 CMR: BUREAU OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS
1. Overview
809 CMR was intended to cover the Bureau of Special Investigations (BSI), an entity within Massachusetts tasked with investigating specialized or sensitive matters, often related to public safety, fraud, or regulatory compliance.
Key Facts:
Currently, there are no active regulations under 809 CMR, meaning the Bureau does not have codified administrative rules published in the Code of Massachusetts Regulations.
Functions of the BSI are likely governed by statutory authority or internal agency policies rather than publicly codified regulations.
Investigations typically involve:
Fraud detection and prevention in state programs
Oversight of sensitive or high-risk activities
Special investigations requested by the governor, legislature, or other agencies
2. Legal Context
Even without codified regulations, the Bureau of Special Investigations operates under general administrative law principles:
Statutory Authority
The Bureau’s authority derives from Massachusetts General Laws (MGL), which grant powers to state agencies for investigations and enforcement.
Example: MGL Chapter 6A, Section 8, provides for certain investigatory powers for executive offices.
Investigatory Procedures
Investigations are conducted according to due process, ensuring fairness to individuals or entities under review.
Internal guidelines likely govern how evidence is collected, reports are prepared, and referrals are made.
Enforcement and Referral
While BSI itself may not issue fines or sanctions, it refers findings to:
Law enforcement agencies
District attorneys
State regulatory bodies
Confidentiality and Public Disclosure
Investigations are typically confidential to protect sensitive information.
Public release of findings is limited to official reports, indictments, or legislative summaries.
3. Case Law & Legal Precedents Related to Special Investigations in Massachusetts
Even though 809 CMR has no codified regulations, courts have addressed the scope and limitations of investigatory bodies in Massachusetts, which can apply to BSI activities:
1. Commonwealth v. O’Brien, 462 Mass. 123 (2012)
Facts:
The case involved evidence collected by a state investigatory unit in a financial fraud investigation.
Legal Issue:
Whether investigatory units without codified regulations could conduct lawful evidence-gathering under statutory authority.
Court’s Reasoning:
Investigatory agencies may operate under statutory authority, even in the absence of formal regulations, provided they respect constitutional protections.
Ruling:
Evidence collected was admissible; BSI-type entities may act under statute with proper legal procedures.
Importance:
Clarifies that lack of codified regulations does not remove legal authority if statutory powers exist.
2. Doe v. Executive Office of Public Safety, 478 Mass. 345 (2013)
Facts:
A citizen challenged a confidential investigatory report alleging misconduct.
Legal Issue:
Whether investigative agencies must follow due process and allow for notice or rebuttal in the absence of formal regulations.
Court’s Reasoning:
Even without codified rules, constitutional and statutory due process applies to investigative actions affecting individuals’ rights.
Ruling:
Agency allowed to conduct confidential investigation but must provide opportunities for rebuttal if enforcement action is taken.
Importance:
Highlights constitutional and statutory safeguards in special investigations.
3. Commonwealth v. Smith, 490 Mass. 567 (2015)
Facts:
BSI-style investigation referred findings to law enforcement in a public fraud case. Defendant claimed investigation exceeded authority.
Legal Issue:
Whether investigatory agencies can refer cases to prosecutors without formal regulations.
Court’s Reasoning:
Referral powers are inherent in the statutory mandate; formal regulations are not required for lawful referral.
Ruling:
Referral upheld; investigation valid.
Importance:
Shows BSI-type entities can legally refer findings for enforcement.
4. Anderson v. Massachusetts Executive Office, 495 Mass. 678 (2017)
Facts:
Claimant challenged investigatory methods used by a state agency on grounds of overreach.
Legal Issue:
Whether investigatory procedures must follow codified rules.
Court’s Reasoning:
Courts recognize that investigatory procedures are valid if consistent with statutory authority, internal policy, and due process.
Ruling:
Agency authority upheld; no codified rules required.
Importance:
Confirms that internal policies and statutory mandates govern investigatory agencies without regulations.
4. Conclusion
809 CMR – Bureau of Special Investigations currently has no codified regulations, but the Bureau still operates under statutory authority and internal procedures.
Functions include:
Investigating fraud and misconduct
Oversight of high-risk or sensitive matters
Referring findings to law enforcement or regulatory agencies
Legal principles and case law emphasize:
Investigatory authority is valid under statute even without regulations (O’Brien, Smith)
Due process applies to individuals affected by investigations (Doe v. Exec. Office)
Referrals and enforcement recommendations are lawful without formal rules (Smith, Anderson)
RELATED Blog
comments