Commonwealth v. Shelley, 477 Mass. 642

In 2013 Walter Shelley was tried for the 1969 killing of John McCabe; a jury convicted him of first‑degree murder and the judge later reduced it to second‑degree murder.
Manslaughter has a six‑year statute of limitations in Massachusetts; murder does not. The manslaughter limitations period had long expired for the 1969 death.
At trial Shelley requested an instruction on involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of murder; the trial judge refused to give that instruction unless Shelley waived the statute‑of‑limitations defense.
The judge followed the U.S. Supreme Court’s rule in Spaziano, offering Shelley the choice to waive the limitations period to obtain the manslaughter instruction; Shelley declined and the judge did not instruct on manslaughter.
Shelley appealed, arguing Massachusetts law should require a greater protection (i.e., allow the instruction without waiver); the Commonwealth argued for applying Spaziano. The court affirmed the trial judge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a defendant is entitled to a lesser included offense instruction when conviction of that lesser offense is barred by the statute of limitations	Commonwealth: Spaziano governs; defendant must waive the statute of limitations to obtain the instruction	Shelley: Massachusetts law (statute and common law) entitles defendant to both the instruction and to assert the limitations defense; cannot be forced to choose	Court: Apply Spaziano — no entitlement to the instruction unless defendant waives limitations defense
Whether Massachusetts due process or statutes require a more protective rule than Spaziano	Commonwealth: Federal due process (Spaziano) suffices; no need for state constitutional expansion	Shelley: State law (G. L. c. 278, § 12 and jury role) is more protective and requires both rights to be honored	Court: Declines to adopt more protective alternatives (Short or Delisle); Massachusetts due process does not demand more than Spaziano
Whether the trial judge’s procedure offering the choice to waive the limitations defense was correct	Commonwealth: Proper to let defendant elect waiver to secure instruction	Shelley: Forcing election undermines statutory protections and jury role	Court: Procedure was correct; judge should present the choice (and may pose limitations issues to jury via special question when disputed)

Spaziano v. Florida, 468 U.S. 447 (holds defendant must waive statute of limitations to obtain instruction on time‑barred lesser included offense)
Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (limits on when lesser included offense instructions are constitutionally required)
Woodward, 427 Mass. 659 (Massachusetts law on lesser included offense instructions)
State v. Short, 131 N.J. 47 (New Jersey rule requiring instruction on time‑barred lesser offense without informing jury of time bar)
State v. Delisle, 162 Vt. 293 (Vermont rule allowing instruction but requiring jury be told a conviction would be barred by time)
Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624 (discussion of lesser included instructions and due process)