Results
Philip Ayala v. Sean Medeiros - Federal District Court allowed Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
2022 WL 15523463 (2022)
The District Court held that defense counsel's failure to obtain mental health records of sole witness identifying defendant as shooter was deficient performance, on claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Commonwealth v. Paulo Tavares - Order denying Motion for a New Trial reversed in this first degree murder case
2019 WL 3368076 (July 26, 2019)
In reversing the denial of a Motion to Suppress with respect to an automobile stop, the SJC held that the officer’s request to see driver's license and rental agreement unlawfully extended the initial stop, that the evidence obtained as result of unlawfully extended stop was inadmissible as fruit of poisonous tree, and that the improper admission of illegally obtained evidence was not harmless. In addition, the Court ordered the Plymouth District Attorney’s office to produce the previously denied post-conviction discovery for re-trial.
Commonwealth v. Robert Wade - Order denying forensic testing reversed
475 Mass. 54 (2016)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Plymouth Superior Court’s second denial of DNA testing under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A. The Court held that the Defendant, who demonstrated that the requested DNA testing was undeveloped at the time of his conviction, was not required to satisfy any of the other enumerated reasons for explaining why the evidence was not subjected to the requested testing. The Court rejected the Commonwealth’s argument that the Defendant was required to establish the “primary reason” why the evidence was not tested at the time of the murder conviction. And the Court held that the trial court should have allowed the Defendant’s motion to strike all privileged communications disclosed by trial counsel because the statute only requires consideration of what “a reasonably effective attorney” would have done, and therefore does not require that trial counsel testify to privileged information.
Doktor v. Doktor - My client's alimony judgment affirmed
407 Mass. 547 (2015)
In a case of first impression regarding the newly enacted Alimony Reform Act, the Supreme Judicial Court held that the Legislature intended the Act's retirement provision to have prospective application, and so the Act was held not applicable to modification of the alimony judgment.
Commonwealth v. John Burgos - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
470 Mass. 133 (2014)
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Defendant’s first degree murder conviction and held that the Defendant’s motion to suppress a secretly recorded conversation between him and an informant working with the police was erroneously denied. The Court held that the Bristol Superior Court should have excluded the recorded conversation at trial, and the Supreme Judicial Court remanded the case for a new trial without the evidence of the conversation recorded in violation of the wiretap statute.
Commonwealth v. Robert Wade - Order denying forensic testing reversed, remanded
467 Mass. 496 (2014)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Plymouth Superior Court’s denial of DNA testing under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A and remanded the case to the Superior Court. Rejecting all of the Commonwealth’s arguments, the SJC held that the Defendant demonstrated that the requested scientific analysis had the potential to result in evidence that was material to identification of the perpetrator of the crime; the motion provided information demonstrating that the evidence or biological material had not been subjected to the requested analysis; the standard used for reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims did not apply for purposes of ruling on the 278A motion; the defendant's motion and accompanying affidavit made the requisite assertion of factual innocence necessary for hearing on motion; and the assertion of factual innocence necessary for hearing on motion did not require defendant to assert his innocence on every conceivable theory of guilt.
Commonwealth v. Overmyer - Order allowing Motion to Suppress upheld
469 Mass. 16 (2014)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court Court held that the strong or very strong odor of unburnt marijuana emanating from defendant's vehicle, standing alone, did not provide probable cause for police officers to search defendant's automobile. The Court reasoned that such characterizations of odors as strong or weak are inherently subjective because what one person believes to be a powerful scent may fail to register as potently for another.
Casiano-Jimenez v. United States - Reversed and remanded
(No. 11-2049),
On November 30, 2012, the First Circuit Court of Appeals remanded my client’s habeas corpus case to the District Court for fact-finding as to whether his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to advise him of his right to testify on his own behalf.
Commonwealth v. Badillo and Smith - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
81 Mass. App. Court 1142 (2012)
The Massachusetts Appeals Court reversed my client’s conviction for second degree murder, stating, “[w]e are not substantially confident that, in the absence of the improperly admitted medical evidence and autopsy photographs, the jury verdict would have been the same.”
Commonwealth v. Mackinnon - Motion for a New Trial allowed
On December 12, 2012, after a multi-day evidentiary hearing, the Hampden Superior Court allowed my Motion for a New Trial on the basis of the newly discovered evidence. We were able to obtain release of the client before Christmas, and the Commonwealth did not re-try him.
Holmes v. Spencer - Reversed and remanded
685 F.3d 51 (2012)
The First Circuit Court of Appeals remanded my client’s habeas corpus case to the District Court for fact-finding as to whether grounds exist to equitably toll the statute of limitations.
Commonwealth v. Colleran - First degree murder verdict reduced to second degree
452 Mass. 417 (2008)
My client, a young mother who suffered from bipolar disorder and who was not taking her medication, was convicted of first degree murder of her child. She was found incompetent to stand trial for several months. For the first time in almost twenty years, the Supreme Judicial Court invoked its authority under G.L. c. 278, section 33E. That section gives the SJC the power to reduce a verdict in a first degree murder case, if, after plenary review, the SJC decides that a reduced verdict is more consonant with justice. In the Colleran case, the SJC reduced the verdict from first to second degree murder where mental illness was a factor.
Commonwealth v. Coren - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
437 Mass. 723 (2002)
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Defendant's conviction of first degree murder and also his conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm. The Court, Cordy, J., held that the prosecutor's errors during closing argument in misstating evidence constituted reversible error and also that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding that defendant possessed gun outside of his residence. This case has been cited more than 300 times since its decision.
In Re Custody of Kali - Judgment in favor of my client affirmed
439 Mass. 834 (2003)
The Supreme Judicial Court held that, in a custody case between unmarried parents, the touchstone issue is best interests of the child. This case has been cited more than 100 times since its decision.
Commonwealth v. Dempsey - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
49 Mass. App. Ct. 247 (2000)
The Defendant in this case was apprehended in Canada because of the television show "America's Most Wanted." The Appeals Court, Armstrong, C.J., reversed the conviction of second degree murder and held erroneous the jury instruction that, to prove the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter, the Commonwealth had the affirmative burden to prove that defendant killed victim as a result of sudden combat in the heat of passion.
Commonwealth v. Gualberto Barrero Cruz - Reduction of verdict from first degree to second degree murder
Suffolk Superior Court allowed the Defendant’s Motion to Reduce Verdict where, at the time of trial, neither the parties nor the Court realized that the home invasion statute had been amended between the date of the crime and the date of trial. Home invasion was the predicate statute for the Defendant’s conviction of felony murder. Because of the post-trial realization that the predicate statute in effect at the time of the offense was not a felony that was punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the Superior Court reduced the Defendant’s conviction from first degree murder to second degree murder.
Robidoux v. O'Brien,
643 F.3d 223, cert. denied, 132 S.Ct. 866 (2011)
In this case, which was the subject of much national media attention, including an hour long television documentary on "Twenty Twenty," my client was a member of a religious cult who was convicted of first degree murder for withholding food from his child. In the Supreme Judicial Court, in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and in my petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, I argued that trial counsel was ineffective where he failed to have his client evaluated for competence resulting in the Defendant's trial in an incompetent state, incapable of asserting an insanity defense.
See Sheri Qualters, "In challenge to murder conviction of cult member over son's starvation death, 1st Circuit weighs competency issue," National Law Review (March 8, 2011). http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202484883276&slreturn=1
Commonwealth v. Griffin, Judgment of conviction reversed, remanded for new trial
76 Mass.App.Ct. 1132 (2010)
The Massachusetts Appeals Court reversed my client’s judgment of conviction where the Superior Court improperly admitted evidence of first complaint, remanding the case for a new trial.
Wade v. Brady,
460 F.Supp.2d 226 (D.Mass. 2006)
In a twenty-five page decision, the Federal District Court (Gertner, J.) denied the government's Motion to Dismiss this Section 1983 civil rights case, holding that my client was denied meaningful access to courts, post-conviction, by withholding access to potentially favorable DNA evidence. The case is currently stayed in federal District Court, pending the outcome of the state court proceedings under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A. See Eric T. Berkman, Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, (November 6, 2006), http://masslawyersweekly.com/2006/11/06/prisoner-has-right-to-dna-testing/
Connors v. Northeast Hospital,
439 Mass. 469 (2003)
This case involved an accident in an icy parking lot at a hospital, and the plaintiff's judgment was reduced under the charitable immunity cap. We argued that the hospital failed to establish its burden of proving the affirmative defense because the hospital was functioning as commercial enterprise, unrelated to a charitable purpose. On direct appellate review, the Supreme Judicial Court, Marshall, C.J., held that, for purposes of the charitable immunity statutory cap, an institution will be classed as charitable if the dominant purpose of its work is for the public good, and the work done for it members is but the means adopted for this purpose. This case has been cited more than 100 times since its decision.
United States v. Santiago,
560 F.3d 62, cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 140 (2009).
To the First Circuit Court of Appeals and to the United States Supreme Court in my petition for certiorari, I argued that the District Court's admission of coded language testimony by an investigating officer was error where the officer was not qualified as an expert, where he had no expertise, and where the testimony was highly speculative. Notwithstanding split circuits on this issue, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari.
Foley v. Morris,
68 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2007)
This case involved a petition to partition. In ruling for my client, the Appeals Court held that procedural irregularities required the Probate Court to vacate its interlocutory order. The Appeals Court based its decision on the fact that the Probate Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the transcript of the trial court proceeding were not provided to the Single Justice
Onofrio v. Department of Mental Health,
411 Mass. 657 (1992)
In 1991, the first Court where I ever appeared was the Supreme Judicial Court. In this case of first impression, the Supreme Court held that post-judgment interest is not recoverable under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act. Appearing before Justices Liacos, Wilkins, Abrams, Nolan, and Lynch, I urged the Court on direct appellate review to allow an order of post-judgment interest on the plaintiff/appellant’s negligence judgment against the defendant, the Department of Mental Health. In denying the award of post-judgment interest, the Court held that the rules of construction governing statutory waivers of sovereign immunity are stringent and that waiver of sovereign immunity must be expressed by terms of statute or appear by necessary implication from them.
Philip Ayala v. Sean Medeiros - Federal District Court allowed Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
2022 WL 15523463 (2022)
The District Court held that defense counsel's failure to obtain mental health records of sole witness identifying defendant as shooter was deficient performance, on claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Commonwealth v. Paulo Tavares - Order denying Motion for a New Trial reversed in this first degree murder case
2019 WL 3368076 (July 26, 2019)
In reversing the denial of a Motion to Suppress with respect to an automobile stop, the SJC held that the officer’s request to see driver's license and rental agreement unlawfully extended the initial stop, that the evidence obtained as result of unlawfully extended stop was inadmissible as fruit of poisonous tree, and that the improper admission of illegally obtained evidence was not harmless. In addition, the Court ordered the Plymouth District Attorney’s office to produce the previously denied post-conviction discovery for re-trial.
Commonwealth v. Robert Wade - Order denying forensic testing reversed
475 Mass. 54 (2016)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Plymouth Superior Court’s second denial of DNA testing under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A. The Court held that the Defendant, who demonstrated that the requested DNA testing was undeveloped at the time of his conviction, was not required to satisfy any of the other enumerated reasons for explaining why the evidence was not subjected to the requested testing. The Court rejected the Commonwealth’s argument that the Defendant was required to establish the “primary reason” why the evidence was not tested at the time of the murder conviction. And the Court held that the trial court should have allowed the Defendant’s motion to strike all privileged communications disclosed by trial counsel because the statute only requires consideration of what “a reasonably effective attorney” would have done, and therefore does not require that trial counsel testify to privileged information.
Doktor v. Doktor - My client's alimony judgment affirmed
407 Mass. 547 (2015)
In a case of first impression regarding the newly enacted Alimony Reform Act, the Supreme Judicial Court held that the Legislature intended the Act's retirement provision to have prospective application, and so the Act was held not applicable to modification of the alimony judgment.
Commonwealth v. John Burgos - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
470 Mass. 133 (2014)
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Defendant’s first degree murder conviction and held that the Defendant’s motion to suppress a secretly recorded conversation between him and an informant working with the police was erroneously denied. The Court held that the Bristol Superior Court should have excluded the recorded conversation at trial, and the Supreme Judicial Court remanded the case for a new trial without the evidence of the conversation recorded in violation of the wiretap statute.
Commonwealth v. Robert Wade - Order denying forensic testing reversed, remanded
467 Mass. 496 (2014)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Plymouth Superior Court’s denial of DNA testing under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A and remanded the case to the Superior Court. Rejecting all of the Commonwealth’s arguments, the SJC held that the Defendant demonstrated that the requested scientific analysis had the potential to result in evidence that was material to identification of the perpetrator of the crime; the motion provided information demonstrating that the evidence or biological material had not been subjected to the requested analysis; the standard used for reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims did not apply for purposes of ruling on the 278A motion; the defendant's motion and accompanying affidavit made the requisite assertion of factual innocence necessary for hearing on motion; and the assertion of factual innocence necessary for hearing on motion did not require defendant to assert his innocence on every conceivable theory of guilt.
Commonwealth v. Overmyer - Order allowing Motion to Suppress upheld
469 Mass. 16 (2014)
In this case of first impression, the Supreme Judicial Court Court held that the strong or very strong odor of unburnt marijuana emanating from defendant's vehicle, standing alone, did not provide probable cause for police officers to search defendant's automobile. The Court reasoned that such characterizations of odors as strong or weak are inherently subjective because what one person believes to be a powerful scent may fail to register as potently for another.
Casiano-Jimenez v. United States - Reversed and remanded
(No. 11-2049),
On November 30, 2012, the First Circuit Court of Appeals remanded my client’s habeas corpus case to the District Court for fact-finding as to whether his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to advise him of his right to testify on his own behalf.
Commonwealth v. Badillo and Smith - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
81 Mass. App. Court 1142 (2012)
The Massachusetts Appeals Court reversed my client’s conviction for second degree murder, stating, “[w]e are not substantially confident that, in the absence of the improperly admitted medical evidence and autopsy photographs, the jury verdict would have been the same.”
Commonwealth v. Mackinnon - Motion for a New Trial allowed
On December 12, 2012, after a multi-day evidentiary hearing, the Hampden Superior Court allowed my Motion for a New Trial on the basis of the newly discovered evidence. We were able to obtain release of the client before Christmas, and the Commonwealth did not re-try him.
Holmes v. Spencer - Reversed and remanded
685 F.3d 51 (2012)
The First Circuit Court of Appeals remanded my client’s habeas corpus case to the District Court for fact-finding as to whether grounds exist to equitably toll the statute of limitations.
Commonwealth v. Colleran - First degree murder verdict reduced to second degree
452 Mass. 417 (2008)
My client, a young mother who suffered from bipolar disorder and who was not taking her medication, was convicted of first degree murder of her child. She was found incompetent to stand trial for several months. For the first time in almost twenty years, the Supreme Judicial Court invoked its authority under G.L. c. 278, section 33E. That section gives the SJC the power to reduce a verdict in a first degree murder case, if, after plenary review, the SJC decides that a reduced verdict is more consonant with justice. In the Colleran case, the SJC reduced the verdict from first to second degree murder where mental illness was a factor.
Commonwealth v. Coren - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
437 Mass. 723 (2002)
The Supreme Judicial Court reversed the Defendant's conviction of first degree murder and also his conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm. The Court, Cordy, J., held that the prosecutor's errors during closing argument in misstating evidence constituted reversible error and also that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding that defendant possessed gun outside of his residence. This case has been cited more than 300 times since its decision.
In Re Custody of Kali - Judgment in favor of my client affirmed
439 Mass. 834 (2003)
The Supreme Judicial Court held that, in a custody case between unmarried parents, the touchstone issue is best interests of the child. This case has been cited more than 100 times since its decision.
Commonwealth v. Dempsey - Judgment of conviction reversed, verdict set aside
49 Mass. App. Ct. 247 (2000)
The Defendant in this case was apprehended in Canada because of the television show "America's Most Wanted." The Appeals Court, Armstrong, C.J., reversed the conviction of second degree murder and held erroneous the jury instruction that, to prove the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter, the Commonwealth had the affirmative burden to prove that defendant killed victim as a result of sudden combat in the heat of passion.
Commonwealth v. Gualberto Barrero Cruz - Reduction of verdict from first degree to second degree murder
Suffolk Superior Court allowed the Defendant’s Motion to Reduce Verdict where, at the time of trial, neither the parties nor the Court realized that the home invasion statute had been amended between the date of the crime and the date of trial. Home invasion was the predicate statute for the Defendant’s conviction of felony murder. Because of the post-trial realization that the predicate statute in effect at the time of the offense was not a felony that was punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the Superior Court reduced the Defendant’s conviction from first degree murder to second degree murder.
Robidoux v. O'Brien,
643 F.3d 223, cert. denied, 132 S.Ct. 866 (2011)
In this case, which was the subject of much national media attention, including an hour long television documentary on "Twenty Twenty," my client was a member of a religious cult who was convicted of first degree murder for withholding food from his child. In the Supreme Judicial Court, in the First Circuit Court of Appeals, and in my petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court, I argued that trial counsel was ineffective where he failed to have his client evaluated for competence resulting in the Defendant's trial in an incompetent state, incapable of asserting an insanity defense.
See Sheri Qualters, "In challenge to murder conviction of cult member over son's starvation death, 1st Circuit weighs competency issue," National Law Review (March 8, 2011). http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202484883276&slreturn=1
Commonwealth v. Griffin, Judgment of conviction reversed, remanded for new trial
76 Mass.App.Ct. 1132 (2010)
The Massachusetts Appeals Court reversed my client’s judgment of conviction where the Superior Court improperly admitted evidence of first complaint, remanding the case for a new trial.
Wade v. Brady,
460 F.Supp.2d 226 (D.Mass. 2006)
In a twenty-five page decision, the Federal District Court (Gertner, J.) denied the government's Motion to Dismiss this Section 1983 civil rights case, holding that my client was denied meaningful access to courts, post-conviction, by withholding access to potentially favorable DNA evidence. The case is currently stayed in federal District Court, pending the outcome of the state court proceedings under the new forensic evidence statute, chapter 278A. See Eric T. Berkman, Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, (November 6, 2006), http://masslawyersweekly.com/2006/11/06/prisoner-has-right-to-dna-testing/
Connors v. Northeast Hospital,
439 Mass. 469 (2003)
This case involved an accident in an icy parking lot at a hospital, and the plaintiff's judgment was reduced under the charitable immunity cap. We argued that the hospital failed to establish its burden of proving the affirmative defense because the hospital was functioning as commercial enterprise, unrelated to a charitable purpose. On direct appellate review, the Supreme Judicial Court, Marshall, C.J., held that, for purposes of the charitable immunity statutory cap, an institution will be classed as charitable if the dominant purpose of its work is for the public good, and the work done for it members is but the means adopted for this purpose. This case has been cited more than 100 times since its decision.
United States v. Santiago,
560 F.3d 62, cert. denied, 130 S.Ct. 140 (2009).
To the First Circuit Court of Appeals and to the United States Supreme Court in my petition for certiorari, I argued that the District Court's admission of coded language testimony by an investigating officer was error where the officer was not qualified as an expert, where he had no expertise, and where the testimony was highly speculative. Notwithstanding split circuits on this issue, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari.
Foley v. Morris,
68 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (2007)
This case involved a petition to partition. In ruling for my client, the Appeals Court held that procedural irregularities required the Probate Court to vacate its interlocutory order. The Appeals Court based its decision on the fact that the Probate Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the transcript of the trial court proceeding were not provided to the Single Justice
Onofrio v. Department of Mental Health,
411 Mass. 657 (1992)
In 1991, the first Court where I ever appeared was the Supreme Judicial Court. In this case of first impression, the Supreme Court held that post-judgment interest is not recoverable under the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act. Appearing before Justices Liacos, Wilkins, Abrams, Nolan, and Lynch, I urged the Court on direct appellate review to allow an order of post-judgment interest on the plaintiff/appellant’s negligence judgment against the defendant, the Department of Mental Health. In denying the award of post-judgment interest, the Court held that the rules of construction governing statutory waivers of sovereign immunity are stringent and that waiver of sovereign immunity must be expressed by terms of statute or appear by necessary implication from them.