Commonwealth v. Henderson, 486 Mass. 296

Background

On August 27, 2011, Derrick Barnes was fatally shot on a Dorchester street; police recovered .32 cal casings and two projectiles from the victim's body.
Two men — the defendant (nicknamed "Drano") and a codefendant ("Jigga") — were alleged to have walked up to the porch, exchanged words with the victim (including a reference to "rattin'"), and fired; the codefendant delivered additional close-range shots.
Key eyewitnesses, Shantee Griffin and Rondale Williams, initially identified the defendant and codefendant to police and before the grand jury, but at trial both disclaimed memory or recanted parts of those statements.
The defendant asserted an alibi (dropping his niece at a church event ~7:05–7:10 P.M.) and was convicted of first-degree murder (deliberate premeditation) and unlawful possession of a firearm; he moved for a new trial and appealed.
On appeal the defendant raised ineffective assistance claims (failure to suppress identification, failure to present/expose misidentification evidence, failure to call an identification expert, failure to request a limiting instruction, failure to object to prosecutor misstatements), challenged admission of Griffin’s grand jury transcript, and alleged discriminatory use of a peremptory challenge.
The trial court and the SJC rejected the defendant's claims and affirmed the convictions; the SJC declined to exercise G. L. c. 278, § 33E, relief.

Issues

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Henderson's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance — failure to move to suppress Griffin's out‑of‑court ID	Counsel reasonably declined because Griffin knew Drano and a single photo ID is proper when witness knows suspect	Trial counsel should have moved to suppress as the photo procedure was suggestive	Counsel's decision was not ineffective; no likelihood suppression would have changed verdict (familiarity with nickname supported admissibility)
Ineffective assistance — failure to present/exploit misidentification evidence or retain ID expert	Cross‑examination and closing attacked credibility; expert/additional height evidence would not materially aid defense	Counsel should have used booking sheets and an expert to show misidentification risk	Tactical decisions were reasonable; expert or height evidence would not likely have altered outcome where witnesses denied seeing the shooting and jury faced credibility choice
Admission of grand jury transcript (Griffin)	Transcript admissible substantively where witness feigns memory; presentation method unconventional but within discretion	Transcript cumulative and some parts were not read to witness; admission prejudiced defendant	No prejudicial error; transcript admission discretionary and not likely to have improperly swayed jury given context and instructions
Batson/Soares challenge to peremptory strike of a black juror	Prosecutor did not strike disproportionately; many black jurors were accepted and four of eight seated jurors were black	Strike was part of pattern of excluding black jurors and required inquiry	No prima facie showing of discrimination; trial judge did not abuse discretion given composition of indifferent jurors and seated panel

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Saferian, 366 Mass. 89 (1974) (standard for motions for new trial alleging ineffective assistance)
Commonwealth v. Comita, 441 Mass. 86 (2004) (heightened review for ineffective assistance in first‑degree murder cases; need viable suppression claim and likelihood of success)
Commonwealth v. Carr, 464 Mass. 855 (2013) (witness familiarity with defendant undercuts claim of suggestive identification)
Commonwealth v. Adams, 458 Mass. 766 (2011) (photo arrays and lineups are less critical where witness knows the suspect)
Commonwealth v. Watson, 455 Mass. 246 (2009) (tactical decisions on calling expert testimony reviewed for manifest unreasonableness)
Commonwealth v. Ayala, 481 Mass. 46 (2018) (decision whether to call an eyewitness ID expert is strategic)
Commonwealth v. Keo, 467 Mass. 25 (2014) (limits on imputing a codefendant's motive or statements to defendant absent evidence of shared knowledge)
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 475 Mass. 396 (2016) (bringing and firing a firearm supports shared intent to kill)
Commonwealth v. Andrade, 481 Mass. 139 (2018) (permissible methods for introducing grand jury testimony substantively and preferable presentation practices)
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (peremptory strikes based on race unconstitutional)
Commonwealth v. Jones, 477 Mass. 307 (2017) (prima facie showing for Batson objection not onerous; factors for assessing patterns of strikes)