Commonwealth v. Scott
21 N.E.3d 954
Mass.2014Background
- 1984: victim found beaten to death in Boston; eighteen-year-old with ligature and extensive injuries
- DNA from vaginal/anal swabs and skirt stains matched defendant; underwear lacked sperm
- Defendant was living in Boston then in 1984, living in Atlanta by 2008; arrested in Boston after pursuit
- Defense theory: consensual sex, not the killer; sought to admit third-party culprit and Bowden evidence
- Judge excluded certain reports and lines of questioning; alternate juror replaced mid-deliberations and instructed to start over
- Conviction: guilty of three counts of first-degree murder; appeal pursued on sufficiency, evidentiary rulings, prosecutor’s closing, and jury instructions
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree murder | Commonwealth: DNA plus circumstantial evidence proves guilt | Scott: insufficient link between sex with victim and killing | Evidence sufficient to sustain verdict |
| Admissibility of third-party culprit and Bowden evidence | Commonwealth: evidence relevant; probative value outweighs prejudice | Scott: reports show third parties and failed investigations | Exclusion not error; Bowden and third-party evidence properly curtailed |
| Prosecutor's closing argument referencing excluded evidence | Commonwealth: closing argument legitimate emphasis on case | Scott: prosecutor exploited absence of excluded evidence | No substantial likelihood of miscarriage; argument not reversible |
| Instructions to reconstituted jury after alternates | Commonwealth: proper to begin deliberations anew | Scott: risk of prejudice or structural error | Instructions proper; no reversible error |
| Constitutional dimension of third-party culprit evidence | Commonwealth: doctrine consistent with due process and Art. 12 | Scott: exclusion violates right to present complete defense | No constitutional violation; standards not arbitrary or disproportionate |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Woods, 466 Mass. 707 (2014) (sufficiency review for criminal convictions with circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Conkey, 443 Mass. 60 (2004) (admissibility and weight of circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Rice, 441 Mass. 291 (2004) (third-party culprit evidence connecting links requirement)
- Commonwealth v. Silva-Santiago, 453 Mass. 782 (2009) (limits on third-party culprit evidence; admissibility framework)
- Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006) (constitutional right to present defense; limits on evidence exclusion)
- Commonwealth v. Bowden, 379 Mass. 472 (1980) (Bowden rule on admission of investigation-related evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Smith, 461 Mass. 438 (2012) (limits on exclusion doctrines in third-party evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Ruell, 459 Mass. 126 (2011) (Art. 12 considerations in evidence rulings)
- Holmes v. Trombetta (California v. Trombetta), 467 U.S. 479 (1984) (meaningful defense rights and evidence preservation)