Westfield man’s motion to dismiss charges of animal cruelty is denied

SPRINGFIELD — Despite being found incompetent to stand trial, a Hampden Superior Court judge denied a motion by Westfield's Donald Heenan, charged with deliberately drowning a nursing cat in 2024, to dismiss the charges, according to court records.

Heenan, 68, of George Street, Westfield, was indicted by a Hampden County Superior Court grand jury in November 2024 for felony animal cruelty and animal death by drowning after police say he admitted to and showed one of the city's animal control officers and a police officer how and where he drowned the cat he caught in a trap.

Superior Court Judge Sarah Hamilton handed down the decision after Heenan's public defender requested the charges be dismissed in early March, arguing he was incompetent to stand trial, which Superior Court Judge Janet Mulqueen found on Jan. 15 after an evaluation by three doctors who reported he suffered from a form of dementia and had little or no chance of improving.

When arraigned in Superior Court in 2024, Heenan pleaded not guilty and was released on personal recognizance with conditions that he have no contact with Westfield Animal Control, not engage in animal control practices and not violate any state or federal laws.

He remained free until being charged last October for assault and battery on a teenager and disorderly conduct in Westfield.

Because he violated the conditions of his release, his bail on the two felony charges was revoked, and he was ordered held in Hampden County House of Correction.

While awaiting the disposition of the case in Superior Court, Heenan was examined by the three doctors over 16 months, and each concluded that Heenan "didn't possess the current ability to consult with counsel with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and he did not have a rational nor factual understanding of the proceedings against him," according to a 15-page evaluation.

Based on their evaluations, Heenan's defense requested that the assault and battery and disorderly charges be dismissed, which District Court Judge Tina Cafaro granted on March 4.

While finding Heenan incompetent, the three doctors did report that since his release from custody in January, he had "re-engaged with his neighbors, who keep an eye on him and provide him with daily social interaction." A family member is also providing significant support for him, they wrote.

One neighbor reported Heenan had baked something for her and shoveled snow. She said he was his "old self."

When the motion to dismiss the felony charges was made by Heenan's defense, they relied solely on the doctor's findings of his incompetence.

However, the commonwealth argued in opposition that the charges should remain to "continue to protect the public from a potentially dangerous person."

The commonwealth didn't refute that Heenan has been found not competent to stand trial, but that he "is far from [being] physically incapable of posing a danger to the public. In contrast, he continues to be an able-bodied man who suffers from dementia and lives out in the community."

This was part of the reasoning Judge Sarah Hamilton used when deciding to deny the motion to dismiss the charges.

In her six-page decision, she cited case law, including that when a person is found incompetent, the charges must be dismissed if they have been pending for at least one-half of the maximum sentence they would face if found guilty.

If Heenan was found guilty of the two felonies, he would face a punishment of not more than seven years in prison or two-and-a-half years in the House of Correction.

Neither of those thresholds were reached since his November 2024 indictment.

Hamilton also cited case law that allows a judge to dismiss charges at any time in the interest of justice for two "compelling" reasons: protecting the incompetent person from indefinitely pending criminal charges and protecting the public from a dangerous person.

She wrote that there "are facts that weigh in favor of dismissal in the interest of justice" and that "the court is concerned about the safety risk for this vulnerable defendant should be incarcerated, again."

However, she wrote, "the court cannot make a finding … that the defendant does not present a threat to public safety," referring to the October arrest in connection with assault and battery and disorderly conduct charges.

And while acknowledging Heenan has people in his life that are working on a care plan for him to remain behaviorally-stable that "could address safety concerns, many aspects of it have not been realized," Hamilton wrote.

"As such, the court does not find that the interest of justice is served by dismissal of this case at this point in time," she wrote.

A status conference is scheduled in July, at which time Heenan could again request to have the charges dismissed at or prior to the conference with supplemental supporting documentation, or if he wants the court to consider a plea.

Read the original article on MassLive . Add MassLive as a Preferred Source by clicking here .