Commonwealth v. Szlachta
463 Mass. 37
| Mass. | 2012Background
- Szlachta was convicted in the Superior Court of first-degree murder by extreme atrocity or cruelty for beating death of Randy Maleski on July 8, 2008.
- Defense conceded guilt to murder but argued for second-degree murder based on impaired mental condition.
- Defendant appealed, contending the trial judge erred by not giving his mental impairment instruction and seeking reduction under G. L. c. 278, § 33E.
- Judge instructed on mental impairment per Oliveira (Model Jury Instructions 61-62) after earlier outlining Cunneen factors for extreme atrocity or cruelty.
- Attorney sought Gould-style language linking impaired capacity to the ability to appreciate consequences; the court declined to adopt verbatim Gould language.
- Court affirmed conviction and declined to exercise extraordinary power to reduce sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the mental impairment instruction was properly given | Szlachta argues Oliveira instruction is vague and Gould language should have been used | Szlachta asserts the judge failed to direct consideration of impairment in relation to Cunneen factors | No reversible error; instruction allowed impairment as a factor without adding a new mens rea |
| Whether mental impairment should be a separate element for extreme atrocity or cruelty | Urrea/Gould framework supports considering impairment as affecting atrocity/cruelty | No standalone mental-impairment element; Cunneen governs | Impairment allowed as evidentiary factor, not a separate element (consistent with Cunneen and Oliveira) |
| Whether failure to adopt exact Gould language prejudiced Szlachta | Exact wording was necessary to guide jurors on impairment impact | Exact wording not required; model instructions suffice | No prejudice; model instructions adequate per Oliveira and subsequent cases |
| Whether the 278, § 33E relief should be granted | Conviction should be reduced due to impairment evidence | No basis for reduction given the record | Relief denied; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Cunneen, 389 Mass. 216 (1983) (factors for extreme atrocity or cruelty; malice sufficient; impairment as factor not element)
- Commonwealth v. Gould, 380 Mass. 672 (1980) (impairment may be considered; discretion to instruct on impairment impact)
- Commonwealth v. Oliveira, 445 Mass. 837 (2006) (model jury instructions; Cunneen framework; impairment as evidentiary factor)
- Commonwealth v. Rosenthal, 432 Mass. 124 (2000) (impairment as factor among Cunneen considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Rutkowski, 459 Mass. 794 (2011) (distinguishes when impairment instruction is required on atrocity theory; not here)