Commonwealth v. Tiscione
124 N.E.3d 690
Mass.2019Background
- Defendant Vincent Tiscione was tried (Dec 2015) on multiple firearm and ammunition possession and improper storage charges; jury convicted on all counts; bench trial later on related enhanced charges produced convictions as well.
- Key evidence: roommate/mother testified defendant handled and stored a shotgun under his bed and a handgun in a closet; handgun was hidden by witness and later recovered with a shotgun and ammunition in the apartment; defendant demanded his missing gun in angry statements.
- During deliberations, the jury asked whether a nonunanimous verdict requires acquittal; judge instructed unanimity was required. A juror (No. 44) then left the room, said she could not continue, and reported being upset by argumentative jurors and having significant family health stresses.
- The judge conducted a colloquy, concluded the juror was too emotionally overwhelmed and discharged her for "good cause," then replaced her with an alternate and told the jury to begin deliberations anew. A belated note showed the jury had been deadlocked before discharge.
- Approximately 90 minutes after the alternate joined, the jury returned guilty verdicts. Defendant objected at trial to the juror's dismissal; Appeals Court affirmed, but the Supreme Judicial Court granted further review.
- SJC held the discharge was erroneous and prejudicial (vacating the convictions) but found sufficiency of the evidence as to the shotgun counts; the case was remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Tiscione's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal of a deliberating juror was proper | Judge properly exercised discretion after colloquy showing juror overwhelmed by personal issues | Juror’s distress stemmed in part from jury room conflicts; discharge was not purely personal and thus improper | Reversal: discharge erroneous because juror’s problems were not purely personal and could have affected deliberations |
| Whether discharge was prejudicial (constitutional harmlessness) | Any error was harmless given evidence of guilt and rapid guilty verdict after alternate joined | Discharge likely affected outcome; jury was previously deadlocked and juror had voiced upset about arguments | Error was prejudicial; not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; convictions vacated |
| Whether judge followed required procedures before dismissing juror | Judge held a colloquy and exercised discretion appropriately | More limited inquiry or efforts (cooling-off, recess, admonition, poll other jurors narrowly) were available and should have been used | Judge should have avoided inquiries that reveal deliberations and should pursue alternatives before discharge; failure merited reversal |
| Sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession of shotgun | Evidence of occupancy, prior handling/storing, personal items in same closet supported constructive possession | Argued Commonwealth failed to prove constructive possession or that ammunition was operable | Sufficient evidence to deny required finding of not guilty; convictions on shotgun-related counts would have been supported if juror discharge error had not occurred |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Connor, 392 Mass. 838 (1984) (deliberating juror may be discharged only for reasons personal to juror; careful, limited inquiry required)
- Commonwealth v. Swafford, 441 Mass. 329 (2004) (upholding discharge where juror repeatedly said she could no longer be fair and had withdrawn from deliberations)
- Commonwealth v. Leftwich, 430 Mass. 865 (2000) (discharge permissible where juror showed extreme emotional distress impairing service)
- Commonwealth v. Francis, 432 Mass. 353 (2000) (protecting a defendant’s right to trial by impartial jury; scrutiny required before discharging dissenting juror)
- Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (1967) (constitutional error preserved by objection is reviewed for harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Marini, 375 Mass. 510 (1978) (burden on beneficiary of constitutional error to show it did not contribute to verdict)