Commonwealth v. Pytou Heang
458 Mass. 827
| Mass. | 2011Background
- May 16, 2005: two occupants were killed during a home invasion at 58 Cottage Street, Lynn; Judith Finnerty survived.
- Three armed intruders in black masks entered, restraining Judith and shooting Robert Finnerty and Amy Dumas.
- Evidence placed the Intratec AB-10 handgun on 17 Morris Street with related clothing bearing DNA and gunshot residue.
- Chon Son and Phap Buth were arrested nearby; Baseline DNA and gunshot residue results tied suspects to crime scene items.
- Defendant was located, interviewed, and gave inconsistent statements; he later invoked his right to counsel and silence during interrogation.
- A surveillance videotape from a Pet Express store and various statements were admitted at trial; juror communications post-verdict were also examined.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of ballistics testimony | Lombard’s opinion linked the AB-10 to the crime scene. | Daubert-Lanigan standard required strict reliability and limitations. | Admissible with limitations; no abuse of discretion. |
| Admissibility of gunshot residue testimony | Reside evidence connected defendants to recent firearm use. | Evidence was prejudicial and speculative about timing and involvement. | Relevant and not unduly prejudicial. |
| Admission of the defendant's police conduct and statements | Defendant’s denials and invocation of rights were probative. | Invocation of counsel/silence should be excluded. | No reversible error; tactical use by defense acceptable; jury admonitions adequate. |
| Admission of codefendant Buth's statements | Buth's statements were properly admitted against defendant. | Crawford confrontation concerns and joint-venture implications. | Not error; statements offered for falsity/similarity, not predicate of truth. |
| Admission of surveillance videotape | Proper authentication through witness testimony suffices. | Authentication lacking; reliability questioned. | Authenticated by witness; admissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Best, 180 Mass. 492 (1902) (early admissibility of ballistics testimony)
- Commonwealth v. Lanigan, 419 Mass. 15 (1994) (standard for admission of expert opinion; purpose to assist jury)
- Commonwealth v. Avila, 454 Mass. 744 (2009) (Daubert-Lanigan framework and admissibility review)
- Commonwealth v. Mahoney, 406 Mass. 843 (1990) (trial court broad discretion in admitting expert testimony)
- Commonwealth v. Pagan, 440 Mass. 84 (2003) (merger doctrine considerations; murder convictions)
- Commonwealth v. Kilburn, 438 Mass. 356 (2003) (analysis of expert testimony and evidentiary standards)
- Commonwealth v. Gunter, 427 Mass. 259 (1998) (sufficiency and challenges to expert testimony)
- Commonwealth v. Giacomazza, 311 Mass. 456 (1942) (early ballistics identification admissibility)