Posts tagged "1008815"

Commonwealth v. Pagan (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-088-15)

NOTICE:  All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.  If you find a typographical error or other formal error, please notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Judicial Court, John Adams Courthouse, 1 Pemberton Square, Suite 2500, Boston, MA 02108-1750; (617) 557-1030; SJCReporter@sjc.state.ma.us   SJC-11714   COMMONWEALTH  vs.  JUAN PAGAN.       Middlesex.     January 6, 2015. – June 1, 2015.   Present:  Gants, C.J., Spina, Cordy, Botsford, Duffly, Lenk, & Hines, JJ.       Homicide.  Evidence, Intent, Motive, Age.  Intent.  Mental Impairment.  Practice, Criminal, Verdict, Lesser included offense, Instructions to jury.  Malice.       Indictments found and returned in the Superior Court Department on June 22, 2006.   The case was tried before S. Jane Haggerty, J.; a motion to reduce the verdict was heard by her; and a motion for a new trial, filed on June 13, 2012, was also heard by her.   The Supreme Judicial Court granted an application for direct appellate review.     John F. Palmer for Juan Pagan. Bethany Stevens, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. Afton M. Templin, for Committee for Public Counsel Services, amicus curiae, submitted a brief.     HINES, J.  On July 24, 2007, a jury convicted the defendant, Juan Pagan, of murder in the first degree on the theory of deliberate premeditation.  At trial, there was no dispute that the defendant, when he was sixteen years of age, stabbed Alex Castro Santos (victim) to death.  His defense was that he was not guilty of murder because he had acted in self-defense and with a mental impairment, namely attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and depression, which when viewed in the context of his age, caused him to act reflexively and instinctively.  One month following his conviction, the defendant filed a motion pursuant to Mass. R. Crim. P. 25 (b) (2), 378 Mass. 896 (1979), to reduce the verdict to murder in the second degree, which the trial judge granted and from which the Commonwealth appeals.  After he was resentenced, the defendant filed a notice of appeal.  Subsequently, on June 13, 2012, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial in the Superior Court, pursuant to Mass. R. Crim. P. 30 (b), as appearing in 435 Mass. 1501 (2001), arguing that the court room had been closed during jury empanelment in violation of his right to a public trial under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  Following a hearing, a judge denied the motion.[1]  The defendant thereafter filed a separate appeal from this order.  The defendant’s direct appeal[2] and his appeal from the denial of his motion for a new trial were consolidated […]

Read more...

Posted by Massachusetts Legal Resources - June 1, 2015 at 3:54 pm

Categories: News   Tags: , , , ,