129 N.E.3d 287
Mass.2019Background
- On Sept. 8, 2014, defendant Rhodes met the victim, spent the evening drinking and smoking; surveillance showed them entering a garage bay and the defendant leaving alone about ten minutes later. A tow truck subsequently backed into the garage bay and ran over the victim, who later died at the hospital. Separate blunt-force head trauma preceded the truck impact.
- Medical testimony: victim had multiple severe head injuries (star-shaped wounds, skull fracture, internal trauma) and other experts conflicted whether the head injuries alone were fatal; bloody tire tracks indicated head trauma occurred before the truck hit her.
- Defendant showed police a substantial injury to the tip of his penis while being booked; a friend testified defendant said the victim bit his penis during sexual activity and that the victim had blood in her mouth and passed out.
- DNA and saliva evidence linked defendant to the victim (defendant’s DNA in victim’s mouth and bloodstains; defendant’s saliva on victim’s vagina).
- At trial counsel argued causation (truck caused death) and sought involuntary manslaughter as an alternative (wanton/reckless leaving), but did not request a voluntary manslaughter instruction based on reasonable provocation; defendant was convicted of first‑degree murder.
- Defendant moved for a new trial claiming ineffective assistance for failing to request a voluntary manslaughter instruction; the motion judge (also the trial judge) denied the motion, but the SJC concluded counsel’s failure was manifestly unreasonable and vacated the conviction, remanding for a new trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defense counsel’s failure to request a voluntary manslaughter instruction based on reasonable provocation was ineffective assistance that created a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice | Commonwealth: no instruction warranted because evidence did not support reasonable‑provocation manslaughter and requesting it would have conflicted with counsel’s causation strategy | Rhodes: bite to his penis during consensual sex was objectively and subjectively sufficient provocation to warrant a voluntary manslaughter instruction; counsel’s failure was not reasonable and deprived him of a viable jury option | SJC: Counsel’s omission was manifestly unreasonable; evidence (penile injury, witness statements, expert testimony, counsel’s own closing argument) could have supported voluntary manslaughter on provocation grounds; conviction vacated and case remanded for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Felix, 476 Mass. 750 (2017) (explains standard for voluntary manslaughter instruction based on reasonable provocation)
- Commonwealth v. Walden, 380 Mass. 724 (1980) (definition of provocation that may mitigate murder to voluntary manslaughter)
- Commonwealth v. Groome, 435 Mass. 201 (2001) (objective and subjective components required for provocation instruction)
- Commonwealth v. Acevedo, 446 Mass. 435 (2006) (single blow can constitute reasonable provocation)
- Commonwealth v. Burgess, 450 Mass. 422 (2008) (provocation analysis where violent reaction to victim’s act may mitigate culpability)
- Commonwealth v. Glover, 459 Mass. 836 (2011) (standard for evaluating strategic decisions by defense counsel)
- Commonwealth v. Alicea, 464 Mass. 837 (2013) (error creating substantial likelihood of miscarriage of justice defined)
- Commonwealth v. Pena, 455 Mass. 1 (2009) (applicable standard of review under G. L. c. 278, § 33E)