Commonwealth v. Jackson
471 Mass. 262
| Mass. | 2015Background
- Defendant Michael Jackson was convicted of murder of Jose Lane, unlawful firearm possession, and unlawful ammunition possession after a trial before Judge Brady.
- Defense requested a jury instruction on duress as a defense to intentional murder; the judge declined.
- On March 7, 2006, a juror was later found to be not a United States citizen; motions for mistrial and new trial were denied after a hearing.
- Prior to sentencing, the defendant moved for a new trial under Mass. R. Crim. P. 30; two grounds were rejected and a third was denied after an evidentiary hearing; these were consolidated with his direct appeal.
- During empanelment, the defendant’s fiancée, sister, and step-grandmother were briefly excluded from the courtroom; the trial court concluded the closure was de minimis and satisfied Waller v. Georgia criteria.
- The defendant raises issues on duress, noncitizen juror on the jury, and Sixth Amendment public-trial rights, and challenges under G. L. c. 278, § 33E.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duress as defense to intentional murder | Jackson seeks a duress instruction per Vasquez. | Duress should be available for juveniles; greater authority for juveniles. | Duress not available for intentional murder; no reversible error. |
| Public trial right during empanelment | Closure violated Sixth Amendment public-trial right as structural error. | Closure de minimis or justified under Waller criteria; waivable. | Procedurally waived, but court reviewed for substantial miscarriage; no merit shown. |
| Noncitizen juror on the jury | Noncitizen juror violated statutory requirement; structural error. | Error per Hillery requires automatic reversal absent prejudice. | Not structural error; defendant not shown prejudice; no new trial required. |
| G. L. c. 278, § 33E review of verdict | Possible basis to set aside or reduce verdict due to juror disqualification and related issues. | No basis to disturb verdict under § 33E. | No basis found to set aside or reduce murder verdict. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Vasquez, 462 Mass. 827 (Mass. 2012) (duress not available defense to intentional murder; juveniles not exempt)
- Graham v. Commonwealth, ex rel., 62 Mass. App. Ct. 642 (Mass. App. Ct. 2004) (duress defense limitations and standards)
- Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39 (U.S. 1984) (closure of proceedings and public-trial analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Morganti, 467 Mass. 96 (Mass. 2014) (full empanelment closure not de minimis)
- Cohen (No. 1), 456 Mass. 94 (Mass. 2010) (partial closure not de minimis where voir dire restricted)
- Kohl v. Lehlbach, 160 U.S. 293 (U.S. 1895) (noncitizen juror defect; prejudice required for relief)
- Hillery, 474 U.S. 254 (U.S. 1986) (structural-error framework for juror qualification issues)
- Commonwealth v. Dyer, 460 Mass. 728 (Mass. 2011) (criteria for substantial miscarriage of justice under § 33E)
- Commonwealth v. Wong Chung, 186 Mass. 231 (Mass. 1904) (disqualification of juror; irregularity treated under § 33E)
