Commonwealth v. Cooley (Lawyers Weekly No. 10-119-17)
NOTICE: All slip opinions and orders are subject to formal revision and are superseded by the advance sheets and bound volumes of the Official Reports.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-11691 COMMONWEALTH vs. EDWARD COOLEY. Hampden. March 10, 2017. – July 13, 2017. Present: Gants, C.J., Gaziano, Lowy, & Budd, JJ. Homicide. Robbery. Firearms. Joint Enterprise. Evidence, Joint venturer, Exculpatory. Practice, Criminal, New trial, Capital case. Indictments found and returned in the Superior Court Department on June 29, 2010. The cases were tried before Mary-Lou Rup, J., and a motion for a new trial, filed on October 24, 2011, was heard by her. Stephen Paul Maidman for the defendant. David L. Sheppard-Brick, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth. BUDD, J. In the early morning hours of March 20, 2010, Nicholas Hiller was shot and killed in Springfield while sitting in his motor vehicle. The defendant, Edward Cooley, was indicted and ultimately convicted by a jury of murder in the first degree on a theory of felony-murder,[1] as well as unlawful possession of a firearm and wilful interference with a criminal investigation. In this consolidated appeal, the defendant claims that the judge erred in denying his motion for a required finding of not guilty of murder in the first degree and unlawful possession of a firearm. The defendant further argues that the judge improperly denied his motion for a new trial, which was based on the Commonwealth’s failure to disclose allegedly exculpatory evidence that had been specifically requested. We affirm the defendant’s convictions and the judge’s order denying his motion for a new trial. After a review of the entire record, we also decline to reduce or set aside the defendant’s murder conviction under G. L. c. 278, § 33E. Background. We summarize the facts in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, reserving certain details for discussion of specific issues. At approximately 12:20 A.M. on March 20, 2010, in a Springfield neighborhood, a witness heard two shots fired. She looked out her window and saw two men speaking in a “panicking way”; the men then ran in opposite directions. Other witnesses also heard the gunshots, soon followed by the sound of a motor vehicle crashing. The victim’s motor vehicle had crashed through a fence, struck another vehicle, and come to a stop in the yard of one of the witnesses. The victim was slumped over in the driver’s seat and bleeding heavily. As the witnesses […]