Commonwealth v. Grant
940 N.E.2d 448
Mass. App. Ct.2010Background
- Defendant convicted by a Superior Court jury of three counts of rape under G. L. c. 265, § 22; appeals contest trial errors and public-trial rights.
- Defendant claims public-trial violation during general venire questioning and during in-chambers individual voir dire; asserts motion for a new trial lacked an evidentiary hearing.
- Court concurs there was a constitutional closure during individual voir dire and that the judge failed to make closure findings; remands to determine general voir dire closure and its de minimis nature.
- Individual voir dire was conducted in the judge’s chambers with only judge, prosecutor, and defense present; this constitutes closure requiring on-record findings and consideration of alternatives.
- Waiver of the public-trial right is unclear; remand to determine whether the defendant knowingly waived the right and whether defense counsel facts support that waiver.
- Other claims are unpreserved; if new-trial ruling on remand is denied, convictions not disturbed at this stage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a constitutional closure during general voir dire? | Grant argues wife and brother were excluded. | Closure violated public-trial rights. | Remand for factual findings on whether closure occurred and if de minimis. |
| Was there a constitutional closure during individual voir dire in chambers? | Closure occurred; required findings not made. | Waiver and privacy concerns justify closure. | Remand for on-record findings and consideration of alternatives. |
| Was there a knowing, voluntary waiver of the right to a public trial? | Waiver supported by counsel’s action. | Unknown to defendant; record unclear on awareness and consent. | Remand for factual findings on waiver. |
| Do the challenged, unpreserved claims merit reversal? | Error at trial level; substantial risk of miscarrying. | Not meritorious given lack of preservation. | Claims deemed not meritorious; no reversal absent remand outcome on public-trial issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Presley v. Georgia, 130 S. Ct. 721 (U.S. Supreme Court 2010) (public trial rights apply to voir dire; open proceedings promote fairness)
- Commonwealth v. Cohen, 456 Mass. 94 (Mass. Supreme Judicial Court 2010) (remand when closure lacking on-record findings; guidance on public-trial scope)
- Commonwealth v. Greineder, 458 Mass. 207 (Mass. Supreme Judicial Court 2010) (closure analysis; need for factual findings on exclusion)
- Commonwealth v. Edward, 75 Mass. App. Ct. 162 (Mass. Appellate Court 2009) (remand for waiver/closure facts when record is unclear)
- Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (U.S. Supreme Court 1984) (closure must be narrowly tailored and findings adequate)