Summary
The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed the defendant’s first-degree murder conviction and the denial of his motion for a new trial. The court addressed the admissibility and limiting treatment of gang-affiliation evidence, the sufficiency of joint-venture evidence, a challenge to a peremptory strike involving a potentially homosexual or transgender juror, impeachment evidence, prosecutorial closing argument, ballistics testimony, and discovery from Federal authorities. The court also declined to grant relief under G. L. c. 278, § 33E.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether evidence of gang affiliation and activity was erroneously admitted.
- Whether the judge's jury instructions on prior and subsequent conduct were erroneous.
- Whether there was sufficient evidence to support conviction as a joint venturer.
- Whether the prosecutor's peremptory challenge of a juror possibly transgendered or homosexual was improper.
- Whether the defendant's sole witness was improperly impeached with evidence of a prior conviction.
- Whether the prosecutor's closing argument contained impermissible statements.
- Whether the Commonwealth was required to seek exculpatory material from federal authorities.
Holdings
- No error. Evidence of gang affiliations was properly admitted to show motive and joint venture.
- No error. Merner largely testified from personal observations, and any hearsay error was harmless because the evidence was cumulative.
- The instruction was ambiguous and could be interpreted as error, but any error was not prejudicial given the strong evidence of guilt.
- Yes. Ample evidence supported the defendant's culpability as both principal and joint venturer.
- No error. The record did not supply the necessary factual foundation to establish a Soares violation or equal protection claim.
- No error. Under G. L. c. 233, § 21, evidence of a witness's prior convictions may be used to impeach credibility if relevant, and convictions relevant to credibility are not limited to crimes involving dishonesty.
- No substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice. The prosecutor's comments were fair inferences from the evidence or legitimate responses to defense arguments.
- No. The Commonwealth provided evidence of cooperation agreements with witnesses; no additional exculpatory evidence was suggested.
Key quotations
“"We say in the law that evidence may not be offered at a trial that a defendant may have previously misbehaved for the purpose of showing his bad character or propensity to commit the crime for which he is being tried. However, such evidence may be offered at trial and considered by the jury only for a very limited purpose. . . ."” (at 401)
“"Now, that evidence, as I say, is not offered to show the propensity of the defendant in this case to commit the crime in this case. It’s strictly, this evidence of his prior conduct and subsequent conduct, prior conduct as far as the crime is concerned and subsequent conduct, are offered for a very limited purpose, and you have to consider this very, very closely."” (at 401-402)
Factual background
On August 16, 1991, the victim Steven Gaul, a member of the Columbia Point Dawgs gang, was shot and killed in Ramsey Park, Roxbury. The defendant, a member of the rival Lenox Street gang, entered the park with two other men. After one companion shot the victim, the defendant stood over him, fired multiple shots, paused to fix a gun jam, and fired more shots. Eyewitnesses saw the defendant and a companion leave the park.
Procedural history
A jury convicted the defendant of murder in the first degree in June 2001. A judge (not the trial judge) denied the defendant's motion for a new trial in 2006. The defendant appealed.