Summary
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court reviewed Keith Hobbs's convictions for murder in the first degree and unlawful possession of a firearm, along with the denial of his motion for a new trial. The court addressed the admissibility and constitutional sufficiency of historical cell-site location information, testimony concerning the defendant's gait, hearsay and confrontation issues, alleged prosecutorial misconduct, and cumulative error. The court affirmed the convictions and the denial of the motion for a new trial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Commonwealth's application for historical CSLI established probable cause and the required nexus between the defendant, the crime, and the cell phone without evidence that the defendant used the phone during the crime.
- Whether the request for three and one-half months of historical CSLI was unconstitutionally overbroad and required suppression of all collected CSLI.
- Whether testimony by a detective describing Hobbs's gait and the suspect's gait improperly identified Hobbs or invaded the jury's fact-finding role.
- Whether admission of testimony that a telephone number belonged to Hobbs's friend violated the defendant's confrontation rights.
- Whether admission of hearsay within hearsay concerning Hobbs's sister's purported identification was prejudicial error.
- Whether the prosecutor's reference to a photograph as a booking photo constituted prosecutorial misconduct.
- Whether cumulative error or the court's extraordinary power under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278, § 33E, required a new trial or reduction or setting aside of the murder verdict.
Holdings
- An affidavit establishing probable cause that a suspect committed a crime and that the suspect owned or used a particular cell phone establishes a sufficient nexus to obtain CSLI for a reasonable period encompassing the crime, even without a direct observation that the suspect used the phone during the crime.
- Where probable cause supports CSLI for a reasonable period encompassing the crime and flight from the crime, an overbroad CSLI order does not require total suppression when the Commonwealth does not rely on or exploit the unsupported CSLI at trial.
- The detective's testimony describing Hobbs's gait and the gait of the surveillance-video suspect did not constitute an impermissible identification because the detective did not expressly opine that Hobbs was the suspect, and any assumed error was not prejudicial.
- Admission of the detective's testimony that a particular telephone number belonged to Hobbs's friend violated the defendant's confrontation rights because the detective's knowledge came from the friend's testimonial out-of-court statement, but the error was harmless.
- Testimony recounting the defendant's sister's out-of-court statement that she had seen Hobbs on television was inadmissible hearsay within hearsay and did not qualify as an adoptive admission by silence, but its admission was harmless.
- The individual errors, considered cumulatively, did not create a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice, and the court found no basis under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 278, § 33E, to order a new trial or reduce or set aside the first-degree murder verdict.
Key quotations
“A direct observation of a suspect's actual use of the cell phone during the commission of the crime is thus not required to establish the requisite nexus between the crime and CSLI.” (slip op. at 16)
“We conclude as a matter of law that the requisite nexus for probable cause existed to support the collection and review of CSLI from the defendant's cell phone for a reasonable period of time encompassing the commission of, and flight from, the killing in this case.” (slip op. at 22-23)
“The Commonwealth has therefore failed to show that the defendant either understood the statement or had an opportunity to respond.” (slip op. at 37)
Factual background
A gunman shot and killed Demetrius Blocker in Roxbury on December 16, 2010, using a .45-caliber handgun recovered from a nearby Dumpster. Witnesses and surveillance footage described a man wearing a puffy black jacket with a fur collar who appeared to walk with a limp. After police released surveillance footage, Hobbs's brother identified the suspect as Hobbs and supplied a telephone number associated with Hobbs; police obtained approximately three and one-half months of historical CSLI, and the CSLI from the date of the killing placed Hobbs's phone near the crime scene.
Procedural history
Indictments were returned in the Superior Court Department on October 26, 2012. A pretrial motion to suppress was denied; a jury convicted Hobbs of murder in the first degree and possession of a firearm without a license; he was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. The trial judge denied Hobbs's motion for a new trial, and the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the convictions and denial of a new trial.