Commonwealth v. Buckman
461 Mass. 24
Mass.2011Background
- defendant Joseph Buckman was convicted of first-degree murder on theories of deliberate premeditation and extreme atrocity or cruelty;
- the case history includes a direct appeal and lengthy post-trial motions with multiple denials and remands for public-trial findings;
- the home invasion and homicide occurred December 19, 1997, at Buckman’s residence, with the victim being Susan Buckman and the defendant found bound in the garage;
- DNA and fingerprint evidence tied the defendant to the crime, including victim DNA on his clothing and his fingerprints on duct tape;
- the defendant challenged public trial closure, third-party culprit evidence, DNA testimony issues, disclosure timing, and closing arguments;
- the court affirmed the conviction and denied relief under G. L. c. 278, § 33E.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public trial closure during jury selection | Buckman | Buckman alleges courtroom closure violated the Sixth Amendment | No general closure shown |
| Admission of third-party culprit evidence | Buckman | Buckman needed third-party proof admitted | No reversible error; evidence not admissible or sufficiently probative |
| False or misleading DNA evidence | Buckman | Hooper's faint results testimony misused | No reversible error; testimony admissible within Mathews framework |
| Late disclosure of expert materials | Buckman | Late-disclosed notes and Hooper materials prejudicial | No prejudicial error; disclosures timely or harmless |
| Prosecutor's closing argument | Buckman | Certain statements aroused unfair passion | No reversible error; arguments within permissible scope |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Cohen (No. 1), 456 Mass. 94 (2010) (public-trial standards; appellate review of closure claims)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 379 Mass. 874 (1980) (burden on defendant to show public exclusion)
- Commonwealth v. Bowden, 379 Mass. 472 (1980) (Bowden defense framework for third-party evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Silva-Santiago, 453 Mass. 782 (2009) (third-party evidence admissibility and probative value)
- Commonwealth v. Conkey, 443 Mass. 60 (2004) (limits on third-party culprit evidence; admissibility guidance)