Commonwealth v. Mejia, 463 Mass. 243

Duffly, J. summarizes the June 11, 2005 murder of Lourdes Hernandez at a Dorchester mini-mart where she worked as a cashier, with about $2,300 stolen.
The defendant, a former employee fired in November 2004, had previously expressed intent to rob the mini-mart and discussed a plan with accomplices.
On June 9–11, 2005, the defendant discussed the plan with Vanessa Pineda and Leann Garcia, which included how to commit the robbery and threats of violence.
Hernandez was found dead inside the mini-mart with multiple stab wounds; the cash was missing; the victim’s vehicle was later found nearby.
The defendant was charged with first-degree murder on theories of felony-murder and extreme atrocity or cruelty, and armed robbery; the Commonwealth introduced witness testimony, physical evidence, a taped statement, and other circumstantial proof.
The trial included defense that forensic evidence was inconclusive and that other perpetrators could have been involved; the jury returned verdicts as stated, with the note and tape recording admitted at trial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Prosecutor’s closing statements prejudiced the defendant	Commonwealth argues statements were within proper advocacy	Defendant contends remarks improperly commented on credibility, emotions, and implied guilt	No reversible error; statements not prejudicial in context
Reasonable doubt instruction misstates law	Commonwealth contends instruction accurately stated burden and allowed alternative theories	Defendant claims instruction confusing or denigrating burden	No reversible error; instruction considered accurate and consistent with law
Admission of postarrest denials in tape was harmless	Commonwealth contends denials were admissible as prearrest statements	Defendant argues denials improper if used as substantive evidence	Harmless error; cumulative corroboration and cross-examination available
Alleged error under G.L. c. 278, § 33E	Commonwealth argues no basis for extraordinary relief on the record	Defendant seeks new trial due to cumulative errors	No grounds for extraordinary relief; judgment affirmed
Rhetorical flourish and vouching concepts	Commonwealth contends rhetoric within permissible force of closing	Defendant claims improper urging beyond permissible advocacy	Not reversible; rhetoric fell within permissible bounds

Commonwealth v. Waite, 422 Mass. 792 (Mass. 1996) (prohibition on postarrest denials; harmless if cumulative evidence exists)
Commonwealth v. Womack, 457 Mass. 268 (Mass. 2010) (admission of postarrest denials; cross-examination mitigates prejudice)
Commonwealth v. Sanna, 424 Mass. 92 (Mass. 1997) (no error in prosecutor's closing remarks about evidence-based conclusions)
Commonwealth v. Barros, 425 Mass. 572 (Mass. 1997) (emphasizes focus on evidence, not sympathy)
Bowden, 379 Mass. 472 (Mass. 1980) (Bowden instruction recommended for reasonable doubt context)
Commonwealth v. Adrey, 376 Mass. 747 (Mass. 1978) (allowed negative language in reasonable doubt instruction)
Commonwealth v. Casale, 381 Mass. 167 (Mass. 1980) (participation and alternative theories in reasonable doubt)