Commonwealth v. Mazariego
474 Mass. 42
| Mass. | 2016Background
- Victim found near train tracks in Worcester, naked below waist, with blunt head trauma and labial abrasions; rocks and a condom recovered; DNA linked the defendant to material inside condom and to exterior mixture; Mancias connected to other DNA on a rock.
- Defendant and co-defendant Julio Mancias had been together with the victim the night of the killing; defendant later told roommate Walter that “they” killed her and described Mancias hitting her with rocks; Mancias admitted killing her to Walter.
- Initial suspect was excluded by DNA; case remained unsolved until 2010 when new testimony prompted police interviews of the defendant (two on April 29, one on May 17), all conducted in Spanish and recorded; defendant made incremental admissions on May 17 including being on top of the victim and acting as lookout.
- Defendant tried to suppress the statements, arguing Miranda warnings were not understood/waived and that interrogation was coercive; the motion judge denied suppression; trial judge admitted parts of the April 29 statements and the May 17 statement.
- Jury convicted defendant of first-degree murder under a felony-murder theory predicated on aggravated rape and also convicted him of aggravated rape; sentenced to concurrent life terms; defendant appealed raising sufficiency, suppression, admission of victim’s daughter testimony, prior-bad-acts evidence, prosecutor’s closing, and postverdict relief.
- Supreme Judicial Court affirmed first-degree murder, rejected suppression and other challenges, ordered the aggravated-rape conviction dismissed as duplicative of felony-murder, and declined §33E relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Mazariego) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency — penetration & consent | Evidence (DNA on condom, defendant on top of victim, labial abrasions, defendant’s piecemeal admissions) supports penetration and nonconsent | Evidence insufficient: abrasions equivocal, no sperm/seminal fluid, alternative explanations; defendant only hugged and didn’t finish | Court: Evidence viewed together supports reasonable inference of penetration and lack of consent; denial of required finding proper |
| Sufficiency — aggravated rape (serious bodily injury or joint venture) | Joint venture & serious injury established by shared plan, defendant as lookout, witnessing/participating, fleeing together | Argues insufficient proof of joint enterprise or serious bodily injury by defendant | Court: Jury could infer joint venture and that serious injury occurred while defendant acted as lookout; aggravated-rape theory supported |
| Sufficiency — felony-murder nexus | Homicide and predicate felony occurred in one continuous transaction; joint venture suffices | Argues killing not contemporaneous with rape | Court: Connection met; felony-murder conviction supported under joint-venture theory |
| Suppression — Miranda waiver & voluntariness | Waivers were knowing and intelligent; interrogation tactics did not overbear will; motion judge credibility findings entitled to deference | Asked who attorney works for; claimed did not understand Miranda; claimed coercive techniques on April 29 carried over to May 17 rendering waiver involuntary | Court: Viewed recordings and transcripts de novo as to legal rule; waivers were knowing; invocation claim rejected; techniques (deception/minimization/religious appeals) not coercive enough to overbear will; statements admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Marquetty, 416 Mass. 445 (circumstantial evidence inferences)
- Commonwealth v. King, 445 Mass. 217 (penetration element in rape)
- Commonwealth v. Sherry, 386 Mass. 682 (force and lack of consent in sexual assault)
- Phillips v. Chase, 201 Mass. 444 (synergy of circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Zanetti, 454 Mass. 449 (joint venture principles)
- Commonwealth v. Gunter, 459 Mass. 480 (felony-murder: continuous transaction test)
- Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 408 Mass. 463 (felony-murder timing/place connection)
- Commonwealth v. Edwards, 420 Mass. 666 (Miranda waiver analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Novo, 442 Mass. 262 (coercion and police misrepresentations)
- Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista, 442 Mass. 423 (deception/minimization as factors in voluntariness)
- Commonwealth v. Tremblay, 460 Mass. 199 (overborne will standard)
- Commonwealth v. Hoose, 467 Mass. 395 (deference to credibility findings and independent constitutional review)
- Commonwealth v. Donlan, 436 Mass. 329 (penetration need not be vaginal)
- Commonwealth v. Gichel, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 206 (penetration as touching of labia)
- Commonwealth v. Barrett, 418 Mass. 788 (admission of prior bad acts for intent/absence of mistake)
- Commonwealth v. Kozec, 399 Mass. 514 (limits on prosecutorial argument)
- Commonwealth v. Judge, 420 Mass. 433 (prosecutorial passion and reversal standard)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 374 Mass. 453 (prosecutor’s right to marshal evidence in closing)
- Commonwealth v. Lyons, 444 Mass. 289 (standard for Rule 25(b)(2) postverdict relief)
- Commonwealth v. Lopes, 455 Mass. 147 (duplicative convictions dismissed)