Commonwealth v. Blanchard, 41 N.E.3d 746

Defendant Michael Blanchard was convicted of second-degree murder and carrying a firearm without a license after a Superior Court jury trial.
After jurors had reached verdicts but before announcement, a court officer inadvertently delivered a binder containing the judge’s copy of motions in limine and unredacted jail call transcripts and other materials into the jury deliberation room.
Counsel reviewed the binder outside the jury’s presence; the judge impounded the initial verdict slips, questioned jurors individually per Mejia, and several jurors recalled having looked through the binder but said they could disregard it.
The judge instructed the jury to resume deliberations with new verdict slips and to decide the case anew without considering the binder materials.
The autopsy-performing medical examiner was unavailable; a substitute medical examiner testified based on autopsy photographs and the autopsy report (the report itself was not admitted into evidence).
Defense cross-examination of the victim’s sister about the meaning of text messages was curtailed by the judge for lack of the witness’s personal knowledge; defendant also moved for a required finding on the firearms count, which the judge denied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether jurors’ exposure to extraneous binder required mistrial	Commonwealth: judge’s voir dire and instruction cured any prejudice; jurors can follow instructions	Blanchard: binder contained prejudicial, non‑record material and jurors reviewed it, requiring mistrial	No mistrial; judge acted within discretion, impounded verdicts, voir dired, instructed jury to redeliberate and presumed jurors would follow instruction
Admission of substitute ME testimony when autopsy ME unavailable	Commonwealth: substitute may opine based on admitted photos and report review	Blanchard: substitute improperly testified to facts from autopsy report not admitted	Admission allowed: substitute may describe what he observed in authenticated photos and offer opinions based on them; no error
Restriction on cross‑examination about text‑message meaning	Commonwealth: witness lacked personal knowledge of sender’s intent; question called for speculation	Blanchard: denial impaired confrontation/right to cross‑examine	No violation: judge properly limited questioning to matters within witness’s personal knowledge
Sufficiency re: possession of firearm without license	Commonwealth: burden to prove lack of affirmative defense only after defendant raises it	Blanchard: sought required finding due to insufficient proof of lack of license	Denied: defendant did not raise licensure affirmative defense; Commonwealth need not prove negative absent properly raised defense

Commonwealth v. Mejia, 461 Mass. 384 (procedure for voir dire after jury exposure to extraneous material)
Commonwealth v. Womack, 457 Mass. 268 (standard for assessing exposure to extraneous material)
Commonwealth v. Fidler, 377 Mass. 192 (limits on probing jurors’ subjective deliberations)
Commonwealth v. Tennison, 440 Mass. 553 (remedy permitting replacement or other steps after juror compromise; deciding anew removes influence)
Commonwealth v. Reavis, 465 Mass. 875 (scope of substitute medical examiner testimony)
Commonwealth v. DiPadova, 460 Mass. 424 (substitute expert may describe observations from admitted photographs)
Commonwealth v. Miles, 420 Mass. 67 (test for confrontation/cross‑examination restrictions)
Commonwealth v. Caldwell, 459 Mass. 271 (presumption that jurors follow instructions)
Commonwealth v. Gouse, 461 Mass. 787 (licensure as affirmative defense allocation)
Commonwealth v. Cabral, 443 Mass. 171 (discussing burdens related to affirmative defenses)