Commonwealth v. Scott
472 Mass. 815
| Mass. | 2015Background
- Defendant Kenston Scott (tried with co-defendant Jaime Resende) was convicted of first‑degree murder (felony‑murder predicated on armed home invasion) and unlicensed firearm possession; armed home invasion indictment later dismissed as duplicative.
- At ~12:45 A.M., two men approached the victim Nelson Pina’s house; the victim and his girlfriend Julia Codling answered the door; Codling retreated to a bedroom and heard a struggle at the door immediately followed by multiple gunshots.
- Physical and ballistics evidence: broken storm door, bullet holes, spent .22 and .32 caliber bullets/casings inside and outside the house; a single .32 caliber fatal wound to the victim; a .357 Magnum at the victim’s legs that had been fired once.
- Trial jury was not instructed adequately on the merger doctrine (that the predicate felony must be independent of the homicidal act); the trial judge granted a new trial on that basis after postconviction review.
- Defendant sought a directed finding of not guilty on felony‑murder (arguing the assault merged with the killing). The motion judge ruled the evidence was sufficient to permit a jury to find two separate assaults (forcing entry and a subsequent shooting) and denied the requested finding; the SJC affirmed that denial on interlocutory review limited to the double‑jeopardy sufficiency question.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for felony‑murder (merger doctrine) | Commonwealth: evidence supports two separate assaults — forcible entry struggle and a later fatal shooting — so armed home invasion can predicate felony‑murder | Scott: only a single assault occurred (forced entry and fatal shooting were the same act), so the assault merged with the homicide and cannot support felony‑murder | Affirmed: viewing evidence in Commonwealth’s favor, a rational jury could find two distinct assaults; felony‑murder conviction was supportable on that evidence |
| Scope of interlocutory review before retrial | Commonwealth: limited review is appropriate to resolve double‑jeopardy sufficiency questions before retrial | Scott: asks broader review (suppression, ID instruction, accomplice liability) for judicial economy | Court: interlocutory review limited to double‑jeopardy sufficiency; other issues are not properly before the court now |
| Predicate felony alternatives (armed robbery vs armed home invasion) | Commonwealth may proceed on alternative predicate felonies if supported by evidence at retrial | Scott: later argued there was no completed robbery so armed robbery cannot be predicate; attempted robbery cannot support life sentence felony‑murder | Court: a felony‑murder may be premised on the commission or attempted commission of a life felony; if evidence at retrial supports armed robbery (a life felony), felony‑murder may be submitted to the jury; otherwise it cannot be based on armed robbery |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Gunter, 427 Mass. 259 (discusses need for predicate felony to be independent from homicidal act for felony‑murder)
- Commonwealth v. Kilburn, 438 Mass. 356 (merger doctrine requires case‑by‑case analysis of whether assaults are separate)
- Commonwealth v. Bell, 460 Mass. 294 (explains merger analysis and jury instruction requirements)
- Commonwealth v. Stokes, 460 Mass. 311 (held pointing a gun in the course of shooting was not separable from the killing for merger purposes)
- Commonwealth v. Quigley, 391 Mass. 461 (earlier statement of merger principle requiring felony conduct separate from homicidal acts)
- Commonwealth v. Latimore, 378 Mass. 671 (articulates the standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Neverson v. Commonwealth, 406 Mass. 174 (double‑jeopardy review before retrial on sufficiency grounds)