Commonwealth v. Stroyny

(Mass, Information obtained in Court Ordered CR evaluation can not be disclosed until the Judge allows)

Click here for full document (PDF)

OPINION: [**1205]
[*637] MARSHALL, C.J. In January, 1995, the defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree on the theory of extreme atrocity or cruelty. n1 Represented by new counsel, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial in April, 2000, which was denied by the trial judge after a hearing. The defendant’s appeals from the jury verdict and the denial of his motion for a new trial have been consolidated.

The defendant argues that the judge failed to conduct an adequate voir dire of the jury venire, and failed to conduct, sua sponte, a voir dire on the voluntariness of several of the defendant’s out-of-court statements. He challenges on various grounds the admission in evidence of the testimony of several witnesses, described below. He also challenges various instructions to the jury. Finally, he makes a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, arising primarily from these same claims of error. We affirm the conviction and the judgment denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial. We conclude that there is no basis for granting relief under G. L. c. 278, ยง 33E .

Click here for full document (PDF)