Commonwealth v. Moffat (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-175-17)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-08733 COMMONWEALTH vs. SHANE MOFFAT. Hampden. April 3, 2017. – November 6, 2017. Present: Gants, C.J., Lenk, Hines, Gaziano, Lowy, Budd, & Cypher, JJ.[1] Deoxyribonucleic Acid. Evidence, Scientific test, Relevancy and materiality. Practice, Criminal, Postconviction relief, Assistance of counsel. Indictment found and returned in the Superior Court Department on February 17, 2000. The case was tried before Tina S. Page, J., and a postconviction motion for deoxyribonucleic acid testing, filed on July 8, 2013, was heard by her. David A.F. Lewis for the defendant. Bethany C. Lynch, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. GAZIANO, J. On October 11, 2001, a Superior Court jury convicted the defendant of murder in the first degree on theories of deliberate premeditation and felony-murder in the shooting death of Malcolm Howard on May 13, 1999. Since that time, the defendant repeatedly has sought postconviction relief, while his direct appeal to this court has been stayed. Shortly after his conviction, the defendant timely filed a notice of appeal; his direct appeal thereafter was stayed while he pursued a motion for a new trial in the Superior Court. The motion judge, who was also the trial judge, denied that motion in March, 2005. The defendant appealed from the denial of his motion for a new trial, and, represented by new counsel, again sought a stay of his direct appeal in order to pursue a second motion for a new trial. That motion was allowed. His motion for funds for deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing was denied, and, on January 6, 2012, the defendant filed an appeal from that denial; his January 10, 2012, motion for another stay of appeal was allowed. In July, 2013, the defendant filed a motion for postconviction forensic testing pursuant to G. L. c. 278A. The same judge conducted a hearing on the motion for DNA testing of four cigarette butts found near the crime scene in October, 2013, and denied it in December, 2013. In May, 2014, the defendant filed an appeal from the denial of his motion for postconviction relief. We consolidated that appeal with the defendant’s direct appeal. In May, 2014, the defendant filed a motion to sever his direct appeal from the appeal from the denial of his G. L. c. 278A motion and a motion to stay his direct […]