Commonwealth v. Cowels (SJC 11630) Commonwealth v. Mims
470 Mass. 607
Mass.2015Background
- 1994 trials of Cowels and Mims for first-degree murder; two bloody towels presented as physical evidence corroborating Salie’s testimony.
- Salie’s credibility was severely challenged at trial, with extensive impeachment and reliance on his testimony for the prosecution.
- Independent DNA testing in 2008 on the towel showed the blood did not come from Cowels, Mims, or Miscioscia (victim), but from an unidentified male.
- DNA testing also identified Mims as a contributor of semen on the victim’s vaginal swab, while Cowels was excluded.
- Trial court denied motions for a new trial; Cowels and Mims later sought review via gatekeeper petitions under G. L. c. 278, § 33E.
- The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court vacated the judgments, granting a new trial and remanding to the Superior Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the towel DNA constitutes newly discovered evidence. | Cowels/Mims contend DNA on towels was newly available. | State argues towels not newly discovered evidence. | Yes; towels constitute newly discovered evidence. |
| Whether the newly available DNA would have been a real factor in the jury's deliberations. | DNA would undermine Salie’s corroboration role. | Nevertheless, overall case strength remained substantial. | Yes; likely a real factor, mandating a new trial. |
| Whether the vaginal swab DNA and related ineffective-assistance arguments were waived. | Waived claims should be considered on appeal. | Waiver applies; issues not preserved below. | Waiver; those issues not reached. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Grace, 397 Mass. 303 (Mass. 1986) (two-part test for newly discovered evidence; real-factor inquiry)
- Commonwealth v. Tucceri, 412 Mass. 401 (Mass. 1992) (focus on whether evidence would have been a real factor in deliberations)
- Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 469 Mass. 340 (Mass. 2014) (newly discovered evidence that undermines key inculpatory results may require new trial)
- Commonwealth v. DiBenedetto, 458 Mass. 657 (Mass. 2011) (remand to address evidentiary issues; conduct of hearings in new-trial context)
- Commonwealth v. Shuman, 445 Mass. 268 (Mass. 2005) (impeachment/corroboration evidence generally not basis for new trial, with exceptions)
- Commonwealth v. Liebman, 388 Mass. 483 (Mass. 1983) (rare cases where undermining credibility justifies new trial)