Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COMMONWEALTH,
Appe 11. ee,
V.
STUART MERRY,
Defcndant/Appellant.
Neil Rossman, E s q .
BBO#43062U
ROSSMAN & ROSSMAN
Two Hundred State Street
Boston, MA 02109
(617) 439-9559
August 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. Cases ................................ iv
C. The T r i a l ............................. 7
4. C l . o s i n g Arguments ................ 15
1
ARGUMENT ......................................... 22
A. The S t a n d a r d Of R e v i e w .................. 21
B. 'The A l l e g e d l y "Spidered" W i n d s h i e l d
A n d T h c B l o o d And S a l i v a O n T h e A i . r b a y
C a n n o t B e C o n s i d e r e d I n Thj.s C o u r t ' s
R e v i e w O f T h e S u f f i c i e n c y Of T h e
E v i d e n c e .............................. 25
1. T h e D a m a g e T o T h e Windshie1.d ..... 25
2. T h e B l o o d And S a l i v a O n T h e
A i r b a g ........................... 26
C. A Medical Kvent, S u c h As A S e i z u r e ,
P r e c l u d e s A F i n d i n g O f Negligencc A n d
Amounts T o A F a i l u r e O f l'roof On A n
E s s e n t . i . a l E l e m e n L O f Motor V e h i c l c
H o m i c i d e By Negligent O p e r a t i o n ....... 29
1. S p e e d i n y and C r o s s i n q Yellow
L i n e ............................. 33
2. T h e B l o o d And Saliva On A i r b a g . . _3 4
ii
3. E v i d e n c e T h a t U e f o n d a n t . ' ~C a r
T u r n e d Sharply B e f o r e A c c i d e n t . . _37
E. D e f e n d a n t ' s T h e o r y Is E q u a l l y
Reasonable A n d Has A S u b s t a n t i a l
F a c t u a l B a s i s Tn T h e E v i d e n c e . . . . . . . . . 3 9
F. The I n a b j l i t y T u C o r r o b o r a t e T h r o u g h
Medical T e s t s T h a t D e f e n d a n t S u f f c r e d
A S e i z u r e O r Medical E m e r q e n c y Does
Not A i d T h c C o m m o n w e a l t h ' s B u r d e n Of
Provinq O p e r a t i o n Heyond A R e a s o n a b l e
Doubt ................................. 42
CONCLUSION ...................................... 49
ADDENDUM
CERT1F:I:CATION O F COUNSEL
I
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
A. Cases
Altman v. Aronson,
231 Mass. 588 (1919) ........................ 3 0 , 31
Berry v. Commonwealth,
393 M ~ S S .793 (1985) ........................ 23, 24,
43
Callahan v. Lach,
338 Mass. 233 (1958) ........................ 31
Commonwealth v . Albert,
310 Mass. 811 (1942) ........................ 25
Commoriwealth v. Arroyo,
442 Mass. 135 (2004) ........................ 47
Commonwealth v. B u r k c ,
6 Mass. App. Ct. 697 (1978) ................. 29
Commonwealth v. Cardenuto,
406 Mass. 450 (1990) ........................ 49
Commonwea1t.h v. CroLt,
345 Mass. 143 (1962) ........................ 21, 2 5
Commonwealth v . Funches,
379 Mass. 283 (1979) ........................ 25
Commonwealth v. Ginnetti,
400 Mass. 181 (1987) ........................ 30
iv
Commonwealth v. Gordon,
422 Mass. 81.6 (19Y6) ........................ 27 n.10
Commonwealth v. Kirouac,
405 M a s s . 557 (1989) ........................ 25
Commonwealth v. Latimurc,
378 Mass. 671 (1979) ........................ 23
Commonwealth v. Maridile,
403 Mass. 93 (1988) ......................... 23, 39
Commonwealth v. Manning,
373 Mass. 438 (1977) ........................ 48, 49
Commonwealth v. Murchison,
392 Mass. 273 (1984) ........................ 48
Commonwealth v. 0' R r i e n ,
305 Mass. 393 (1940) ........................ 23-24
Commonwealth v. Rice,
427 Mass. 203 (1998) ........................ 27 n.10
Commonwealth v . Silva,
366 Mass. 402 (1974) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Commonwealth v. [ J s k i ,
263 Mass. 22 (1928) ......................... 30
Commonwealth v. Webster,
5 Cusk. 295 (1850) .......................... 24
Corson v. Commonwealth,
428 Mass. 193 (1998) ........................ 2 3 , 38-
39, 43
F:l.lingsgardv . Si l.ver,
352 Mass. 34 (196'7) ......................... 31
In re Wj.nship,
397 U.S. 358 (1970) ......................... 23
V
McGovcrn v . Tinglof,
3.14 Mass. 114 (1962) ........................ 31
Orcgon v . Kennedy,
456 U . S . 667, 676 ( 1 9 0 2 ) .................... 48
B. Other Authorities
Prior Proceedings
I n 7 0 0 7 , t h e D e f e n d a n t ( a p o l i c e o f f i c e r ) was
c h a r g e d i n P e a b o d y I I i s t r i c L C o u r t w i t h motor v e h i c l e
Attorney's O f f i c c s u b s e q u e n t i y t r a n s f e r r e d t h e case t o
T h e c h a r y e s stemmed f r o m a n accident in B e v e r l y ,
M a s s a c h u s c t t s , on J a n u a r y 2 0 , 200'7. T h e defense
t h e o r y was t h a t t h e D e f e n d a n t s u f f e r e d a m e d i c a l
emergency i m m e d i a t c l y p r i o r t o t h e a c c i d e n t L h a t
c a u s e d h i m t o slump over i n t h e p a s s e n g e r ' s s i d e of
h i s c r u i s e r a n d r e n d e r e d 1ii.m u r m b l e t o c o n t r o l h i s
car.
1
a s p e c i a l prosecutor i n Suffolk County because i t
9 9 3 ) .2
On March 1 7 , 2 0 0 8 , t h e D e f e n d a n t ' s t . h r e e - d a y j u r y
t r i a l corrtmenced i n Feabody D i s t r i c t C o u r t ( H r e n n a n ,
r e q u i r e d f i n d i n g of n o t g u i l t y aLLer t h e c l o s e o f Lhe
respectively).
The R e s e r v a t i o n a n d R e p o r t i d e n t i f i e d t h e r e c o r d f o r
Lhe f u l l C o u r t a p p e a l a s : ( 1 ) t h e D c i e n d a n t ' s
P e t . i t7i.on, memorandum a n d s u p p o r L i n g e x h i b i t s ( w h i c h
c o n t a i n t h c L r i a l t r a n s c r i p t s ) ; ( 2 ) t h e Commonwealth's
o p p o s i - t i v n Lo t h e D e f e n d a n t ' s P e t i t i o n ; a n d ( 3 ) t h e
R e s e r v a t i o n and KeporL. T h e r e f o r e , the Record
Appcndix i s c o m p r i s e d o f t h e s e t h r e e s e t s o f dncumenks
a n d e x h i b i t s , and s h a l l b e c i t e d h e r c i n as " H . A . [page
number] ." Thc Addendum s h a l l b e c i t e d a s "Add. [ p a g e
number] ." The D e f e n d a n t Lhen f i l e d a M o t i o n t o Kxpand
t h e R c c o r d t.o i n c l u d e t h e t r a n s c r i p L o f t h e a r g u m c n t
beforc the Single Justice. befendant att.ached t h e
t r a n s c r i p t t o t.haL p e n d i n g mot-ion, and ci t a t i u r i s
n
Lheret.0 shall be a s follows: "SJ T r . / [ p a y c n u m b e r ] .
2
It1 stria1 (see Add.27-2 i e n t h o prosecutor
offense. 3 ( R . A . 981).
-
’ Uefendant was subsequently scriLenced to three years
of probation with certain other terms a n d conditions.
3
Not 2" 1 h Disc il iC h e C mmor ZalLh
d i s c l o s e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e t h a t S e r g e a n t Deborah
Ryan, i t s s t a t e p o l i c e a c c i d e n t r e c o n s t u c t i o n i s t , held
a m a t c r i a l and e x c u l p a t o r y o p i r i i u n t h a t t h e w i n d s h i e l d
impact, which d i r e c t l y c o n t r a d i c t . e d a c e n t r a l a r g u m e n t
D e f e n d a n t a n e w t r i a l b a s e d on t h e u n d i s c l o s e d
e x c u l . p a t o r y e v i d c n c e i n t h e r)i s c o v e r y N o t i c e , b u t
f i n d i n g of n o t g u i l t y . (R.A. 1168-1169; A d d . 3 0 - 3 6 ) .
On May 2 2 , 2 0 0 8 , t h e Deferidant f i l e d a P e t i t i o n
doublc j e o p a r d y g r o u n d s , o r a l t e r n a t i v e l y , s e e k i n g t o
d i . s m i s s t h e c o m p l a i n t b e c a u s e oi Lhe p r o s e c u t o r ' s
4
for ll bv 3 i 11 i n a p p r p r i te a n d
c o m p l c L c l y u n s u p p o r t e d a r g u m e n t s d u r i n g h i s closjn g .
h e a r i n y on D e f e n d a n t ' s P e t i t i o n on J u l y 1 5 , 2 0 0 8 , at
(SLJT r . 2 ) . J u s t i c e Cordy s u h s e q u e n L l y r e s e r v e d a n d
A p r o s e c u t o r f r o m Essex C o u n t y was o r i q i n a l l y
R y a n , a M a s s a c h u s e t t s StaLe T r o o p e r who w a s t h c
Commonwealth's a c c i d e n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s L . (R.A 9 9 4 ) .
n o t see a n y d a m a y c t o t h e w i n d s h i e l d c o n s i s t e n t . w i t h
t h e Defendant's head s t r i k i n y i L d u r i n g t h e a c c i d e n t .
(R.A. 994).
S i n c e t h e a c c i d e n t . o c c u r r e d i n Esscx C0unt.y a n d
t h e DefendanL was a p o l i c e o f f i c e r w i t h i . n t h a t c o u n l y ,
5
d e t e r m i n e d , s u a sporilc, t h a t a c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t
r e q u i r e d t h a t a s p e c i a l p r o s e c u t o r f r o m S u f f o l k County
o p i n i . o n t o t h e t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r when t.he c a s e w a s
'The t - r i a l p r o s e c u t o r c l a i m s t h a t when he s p o k e t o
w i n d s h i e l d w a s c a u s e d by h i s h e a d s t r i k i n y i L . (R.A.
S e r g e a n t Ryan, he " m e n t i o n e d t h a t he b e l i e v e d t h e
4
T h i s s t a t e m e n t p r o v e s the L r i a l p r o s e c u t o r p l a n n e d
h i s t h e o r y f o r h i s f i n a l argument p r i o r t o t r i a l , and
y e t , a s a r g u e d i n f r z l aL p p . 4 4 - 4 9 , h e i n t e n t i o n a l l y
( C o n t ' d t o next page)
6
S e r g e a n t Ryan r e s p o n d e d t h a t " t h e b l o o d i s y o u r b e t t e r
argument." (-
Id.). The t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r d i d n o t a s k
comment, n o r d i d h e a s k h e r a n y f u r t . h e r q u e s t i u r i s Lo
d e t e r m i n e i f t h e r e was a n y e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e D e f e n d a n t
~
was s i t t i n g up a t the L i m e o f t h e c r a s h o r w h e t h e r t h e
h e a d o r body s t r i k i n g i t . 5 ( I d . ) .
C. The Trial
On J a n u a r y 2 0 , 2 0 0 7 , t h e D e f e n d a n t awoke at 5 : 3 0
a.m. a n d g o t r e a d y f o r work a s a B e v e r l y P o l i c e
Officer. H c aLe b r e a k f a s t , v i s i t e d h i s g i r l f r i e n d a t
I
t h e Defendant appeared f i n e , f r i e n d l y and r e l a x e d , and
M i n u t e s b e f o r e t h e a c c i d e n t . , t h e DefendanL s t o p p e d
a t a Seven-Eleven t o g e t a f o u n t a i n d r i n k , which h e
s u b s e q u e n t l y p l a c e d i n h i s c r u i s e r ’ s cup h o l d e r . (R.A.
r a p i d l y a c c e l e r a t e d t.o a b o u t 52-55 m i l e s a n h o u r i n LI
a n d d r o p p e d down t o 93% in t h e l a s t .2 s e c o n d s , a n d t h e
the f i r s t 3 . 4 s e c o n d s oL Lhat 1 1 . 4 - s e c o n d p e r i o d , t h e
T h e UefendanC’s c r u i s e r c r a s h e d into a p a r k e d c a r ,
c o n f l i c t . i n g t e s t i m o n y as t o w h e t h e r t h e DeLcndant‘s c a r
d r o v e i n a s t r a i g h t l i n e i n t o t h e p a r k e d c a r (see K.A.
8
334-335, 3 4 6 - 3 4 9 ) , or w h e t h e r i L made a s h a r p a n d
car b e f o r e , d u r i n g a n d a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t , p r o v i d e d
e v i d e n c e w h a t s o e v e r t h a t t h e c a r s t e e r e d o u t o f t h e way
63.7-618), and t h e r e f o r e , t h e p h y s i c a l e v i d e n c e
Munoz t h a t t h e c r u i s e r t u r n e d s h a r p 1 y h e f o r e i m p a c t . 6
9
emergency room medical r e c o r d s r e f l e c t t h a t he h a d
c o n t u s i o n s a n d a b r a s i o n s ; b r u i s i . n g a n d a b r a s i o n s on
boLh knees; s u p e r f i c i a l c u t s on h i s h a n d s ; a n d a
s u p e r f i c i a l l a c e r a t i o n on h i s r i g h t e y e l i d . (R.A.
“ s t a r e d r i g h t t h r o u g h [ h i m ] ” a s i f t h e Defendant d i d
As t i m e wore o n , t h e Ilefendant s L a r t e d t o l o s e
was “ r o l . l . i n q aroLind a b i t . , t r y i n g t o r e p o s i t i o n
h e l p e d Lhc D e f e n d a n t s i t u p a n d t h e n t h e y b r o u g h t o u t
p o l i c e o f f i . c e r t r i e d Lo p l a c e t . h e oxygen m a s k u p t o t h e
D e f e n d a n t ‘ s mouth w h i l e he w a s s l i l l i n s i d e h i s
c r u i s e r , i t i r r i t a t e d t h e Defendant and h e s t a r t e d t o
o f f i c e r "was c h a s i n g [ t h e Defcr.idant] a r o u n d w i t h t h e
When t h e p a r a m e d i c s t r i e d Lo p l a c e t h e Defendant on
a g u r n e y , "he k e p t t r y i n g t o sit. u p a n d he k e p t
Defendant d i d n o t h a v e a n y a l c o h o l o r d r u y s i n h i s
t o F,ssex C o u n t y i n v e s t i q a t o r s i n which h e d e n i e d h a v i n g
11
fainting spells, black outs, or memory loss. ( R . A . 513,
wheel. ( R . A . 519-522).
2. The Dofendant's C a s e ,
(R.A. 759-777).
12
Defendant testified consistent with his posL-accident
c a u s e d by a s e i z u r e v e r s u s a h e a d i n j u r y . (R.A. 04H).
a d d e d ) , h e c o n c l u d c d t o a " h i g h d e q r e e of m e d i c a l
On c r o s s - e x a r n i n a t i o r i , Lhe Commonwealth's r c b u t t a l
case c o n t i n u e d t o d e t e r i o r a t e s u b s t a n t i a 7 1 y when D r .
h a v i n g a s e i z u r e , p a r L i c u 1 a r l . y a f i r s t uric, might n o t
l e a v e a n y i d e n t i f i a b l e m e d i c a l e v i d e n c e t . h a t c a n bc
v e r i f i e d a f t e r t h e f a c t . (H.A. 8 6 5 ) ; ( 4 ) a p e r s o n h a v i n g
s e i z u r e c a u s e d t h e D e f e n d a n t t o l o s e c o n L r o l of h i s c a r
-
conceded t h a t thc D e f e n d a n t ' s a c c o u n t f o r t h e c a u s c of
14
t h e a c c i d e n t w a s “a viable medical theory. rr7 (K.A. 882;
emphasis added) .
D r . Hoch f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t 3 s e i z u r e wou1.d
t o p r e v e n t t h e accident (R.A. 8 8 7 1 , a n d if D e f e n d a n t ’ s
f o o t was on t h e a c c e l e r a t o r w h e n h e e x p e r i e n c e d t h e
t o n i c porLion of a t o n i c - c l o n i c s e i z u r e , h i s s t i f f e n e d
t h e D e f e n d a n t ‘ s car i n e x p l j c a b l y and r a p i d l y
i n t o t h e v i c t i m ‘ s car.
4. C l o s i n g Arquments
D u r i n g Lhe Commonwealth’s c l o s i n g a r g u m e n t , t h e
p r o s e c u t o r showed t h e j u r y a blown up p h o t o g r a p h of
a d m i s s i b i l i L y of t h i s p h o t o g r a p h h a d been s t i ~ p u l a t e d
t o p r i o r t o t r i a l . , it i s undisputed t h a t t h e .Lrial
p r o s e c u t o r n e v e r showed it t o a n y o f t h e witricsses,
n o r d i d h e e l i c i L a n y test.j.mony d u r i n g t h e e n t i r e
15
t h e windshield a s r e f l e c t e d i n t h e photograph. (K.A.
c r a c k i n t h e u p p c r l e f t c o r n e r o f t h e w i n d s h i e l d was a
e v i d e n c e p r o v e d Lhe D e f e n d a n t was s i t t i n q u p a l t h e
t i m e of i m p a c t . (R.A. 9 3 9 - 9 4 0 ) .
f i r s t t i m e d u r i n g closj.ng argument - a p h o t o g r a p h of
of b l o o d a n d s a l i v a on i t a l s o p r o v e d t h e D e f e n d a n t
D e f e n d a n t was s i t t i n y u p a n d c o u l d n o t h a v e beer1
s u f f e r i n g f r o m a s e i z u r e b e c a u s e "a p e r s o n h a v i n g il
s e i z u r e d o e s n o t s i t up."' (R.A. 9 3 9 - 9 4 0 ) .
The D e f e n d a n t o b j c c L c d t o t h e p r o s e c u t o r ' s
c l o s i n g r e ~ r i a r k s on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e y were n o t
b a s c d on a n y e v i d e n c e i n t r u d u c c d at. t h e
trial.(K.A.1109-1110). The D e f e n d a n t a l s o o r a l l y
T h e Commonwealth d i d n o t e l i c i l a n y e x p e r t m e d i c a l
t e s t i m o n y t o s u p p o r t , i t s aryurncnt t h a t a p e r s o n
s u f f e r i n g a s e i z u r e could n o t s i t u p .
16
. .. . ..- .. . . ..-
1116).
D . Post-Trial Motions.
S e v e r a l d a y s a f t . e r t . h e v e r d i c t , t h e DeLendant
f i l e d h i s Motion s e e k i n g a r e q u i r e d f i n d i n g o f n o t
D e f e n d a n t a r g u e d t h a t the p r o s e c u t o r e n g a g e d i n
a f f i d a v i t f r o m G e r a r d L1. Murphy, h i s e x p e r t t r i a l
w i t n e s s on a c c i d e n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . (R.A. 1 4 9 ) . Mr.
s p e c i f i c terrri i r i d i c a t i n g o c c u p a n t c o n t a c t w i t h a
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n h i s c l o s i n g a r g u m e n t , t h e damage t o
9
T h e p r o s e c u t o r also i m p r o p e r l y a r g u e d t h a t . "[tlhe
o n l y w a y t h L [ t h e ] s a l i v a q o t [on t h c a i r b a g ] i s i f
StuairC Merry, h i s f a c e , h i t t h n C a i r b a g at t . h e t i m e oi
Lhe c r a s h . " [K.A. 9 3 6 ; e m p h a s i s a d d e d ] . T h e
p r o s e c u t o r 1 a t e r r e p e a t e d LhaL " [t.]h e o n l y w a y t h e
b l o o d , s a l i v a and t h e s t a r r i n g o c c u r r e d i s i f S t u a r L
Merry w a s s i t t i r i y up a t t h e t i m e o f t h e c r a s h a n d h i s
a i r b a g deployed." (R.A. 9 3 7 ; e m p h a s i s a d d e d ] . T h e s e
were n o t f a i r a r g u m e n t s o r i n f e r e n c e s d u c t o t h e
undisputed testimony of t h e s i g n i f i c a n t post-crash
a c t i v i C y w i t h i n t h e Defendant's c a r t.hat c o u l d have
b e e n t h e s o u r c e oi t h e b l o o d a n d s a l i v a 01.1 t h e a i r b a g ,
a n d due t o S e r g e a n t R y a n ' s s u b s e q u e n t l y d i s c l o s e d
e x c u l p a t o r y o p i n i o n t . h a t t h e r e w a s rio e v i d e n c e t - h a t
t h e D e f e n d a n t was s i t t i r i y up a t t h e t . i m F : o f i m p a c t .
17
D e f e n d a n t ' s w i n d s h i e l d was the r e s u l t o f e x t e r n a l
mot.i.nn f o r a r e q u i r e d f i n d i n g o f n o t g u i l t y , hut
a c c u r a c y of h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t o t h e j u r y r e q a r d i n g
A few d a y s b e f o r e t h a t h e a r i n g , t h e Commonwealth
s e r v e d t h e DefendonC w i t h t h e D i s c o v e r y N o t i c e . (R.A.
c o n c e d e d t h a t t h e E s s e x P r o s e c u t o r h a d s p o k e n Lo
S e r g e a n t R y a n p r i o r t o t r i a l and a s k e d her w h e t h e r
t h e D e f e n d a n t ' s head s t r i k i n g it d u r i . n g t h e a c c i d c n l .
of S e r g e a n t Ryan, t h e Curnoonwealth d i s c 1 o s e d t h a t
bccn s i t t i n g u p , a n d t h a t t h o damage t o t h e w i n d s h i e l d
was i n d u c e d b y t h e i m p a c t of t h e c r a s h , n o t
found t h a t S e r g e a n t Ryan's p r e v i o u s l y u n d i s c l . o s e d
o p i n i . o n w a s b o t h c x c u l p a t o r y and m a t e r i a l t o t h e
t h e e x c u l p a t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n was u n i n t e n t i o n a l , the
j u d q e f u r t h e r f o u n d t h a t t h e t . r i . a l p r o s e c u t o r ncver
opinion. (Add.31-32).
The D e f e n d a n t t h e n s o u g h t r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of h i s
ensued.
i m p a c t b r a k i n q as e v i d c n c c of o p e r a t i o n a n d / o r
n e g l i g e n c e f a i l s t o s a t i s f y i t s burden because t h e s e
f a c t o r s r e a s o n a b l y could have b e e n c a u s e d b y a s e i z u r e .
[Br.40-411. S i m i I . a r l y , the l a c k o f p o s t - a c c i d e n t m e d i c a l
e v i d e n c e c o n f i r m i n g a seizure i s i n s i g n i f i c a n t where i t
exist. [Hr.47-43].
F i n a l l y , no r e a s o n a h l e j u r y c o u l d f i n d t h e
20
i t s a c c i d e n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t a q r e e d t h a t t h e Defendant
b a r s t h e Defendant's r e - t r i a l .
up a t t h e time of t h e a c c i d c n L b e c a u s e , t h e I l e f e n d m t
n o t e l i c i t a n y t e s t i m o n y from his L r i a l w i t n e s s e s a b o u t
t h e damaged w i n d s h i e l d o r t h e b l o o d a n d saliva on t h e
a i r b a g s o h e c o u l d s h i e l d h i s witnesses from a r i y o r o u s
c r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n t h a t h e k n e w would have r e v e a l e d
e x c u l p a t o r y e v i d e n c e and n e q a t e d t h e t h e o r y t h a t t h e
[Br.45]. 'This c o n d u c t v i o l a t e d R u l e : 3 . R ( j ) of t h e
S.J.C.'s R u l e s uL P r o f e s s i o n a l C o n d u c t . LBr.45-471.
t h e p r o s e c u t o r r a i s e d t h e i ssue o f t h e w i n d s h i e l d , b l o o d
21
prosecutor was facing a certain "riot guilty verdict" at
misconduct . [ Rr .47-4 91 .
A. The Standard of R e v i e w .
22
i d h esser i.al I. erne of t h e crime beyond a
d e n i a l uf a d i r e c t e d v e r d i c t , it is n o t criough f o r t h e
a p p e l l a t e c o u r t tu f i n d t h a t t h e r e was some r e c o r d
e v i d e n c e , however s l i y h L , Lo s u p p o r t e a c h e s s e n t i a l
v. M a n d j l e ,
I 403 Mass. 93, 9 4 ( 1 9 8 8 ) . S i m i l a r l y , i f "the
y u c s t i o n of g u i l t of t h e d e i c n d a n t i s l e f t t o c o n j e c t u r e
o r s u r m i s e and h a s no solid f o u n d a t i o n i n e s t a b l i s h e d
23
v. O'H , 3 0 5 Mas 393, 401 ( 1 9 4 0 ) .
F i n a l l . y , a n d most p e r t i n e n l h e r e , i f t h e evidence
pruposilions, n e i t h e r of t h e m c a n be s a i d t o h a v e been
e s t a b l i s h e d by l e g i t i m a t e p r o o f . " Bcrry v .
Commonweaith, 3 9 3 Mass. a t 7 9 6 , a n d c a s e s c i t e d
therein. I n s u c h a c a s e , a r e q u i r e d f i n d i n g of n o t
q u i l t y m u s t b c g r a n t e d b e c a u s e "[a] v e r d i c . t i n f a v o r of
v e r y d e f i n i t i o n o f r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t , a s i n s t r u c t e d by
produce LI m u r a l c e r t a i n t y of g u i l t , a d t o excliide -
my
T h e r e f o r e , i f a j u r y h a s t o employ c o n j e c t u r e when
c h o o s i n g between p o s s i b l e i n f e r e n c e s from t h e e v i d e n c e
24
l e y a l l y i n s u f f i c i e n t a s a m a t t e r of l a w t o s u s t a i n t h e
-
Croft, 345 Mass. at. 1 4 5 , c i t i n g CommonwcalLh v. A l b e r t ,
1. T h e Damaye to Lhc W i n d s h i e l d .
c o n s i d e r a t . j . o n of t h e Commonwealth's i m p r o p e r a r g u m e n t ,
a n d i n f e r e n c e drawn t h e r e f r o m , t h a t t h e damaqe t o t h e
p r o s e c u t i o n had no r e a s o n a b l e p r o s p e c t of L i l l i n g t h e
g a p i n i t s p r o o f t . h a t would be c r c a t c d by t.he e x c l u s i o n
'The D i s c o v e r y N o t i c e m a k e s c l e a r t h a t t h e t r i a l .
25
IacLual basis in the evidence. In fact, Sergeant Ryan
2. T h e Blood and S a l i v a on t h e A i r b a g .
26
a n e v i d e n t i a r y b a s i s upon which t o a r g u e t h a t t h e b l o o d
not. e l i c i t e d t h i s t y p e of tcsLimony f r o m i t s e x p e r t
w i t n e s s e s s i n c e t h i s e v i d e n c e was s u c h ;1 b i g p a r t of i t s
a d m i t t e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e t h a t "noric of t h e s e e x p e r t s
were q u a l i f i e d a t t r i a l a s e x p c r L s on b l o o d s p l a t t e r o r
a n y t h i n g l i k e t h a t , s o i t ' s n o t even c l e a r t h a t t h e y
ChaL e x p e r t t e s t i m o n y r e g a r d i . n g s p l a t t e r e v i d e n c e was
n e c e s s a r y i n o r d e r t o draw ariy o p i n i o n s , c o n c l u s i o n s o r
i n f e r e n c e s r e g a r d i n g t h e p r e s e n c e o f b l o o d a n d s a l i v a on
t h e a i r b a y , and i n p a r t i c u l a r , how t h a t
when a n d -
~
e v i d e n c e was p l a c e d t h e r e . 1 ° ThercLorc, i f t h e
27
Commonwealth i n t e n d e d Lo a r g u e i n i t s c l o s i n g t h a t . t h e
e x p e r t wiCncss t o o p i n e on t h i s s u h j e c t . The
Commonwea1t.h el.ected n o t t o do s o .
C o n s e q u e n t l y , the b l o o d and s a l i v a e v i d e n c e n e v e r
t h a t no r e a s o n a b l e i n f e r e n c e s can he drawn f r o m t h i s
-
P.C., 2 5 Mass. App. Ct. 1 0 7 , 113.-116 ( 1 9 8 7 ) (wlicre
p l a i n t i f f s t r i e d c a s e withoul p r e s e n t i n g e x p e r t
t.estimony t h a t was r e q u i r e d t o e s t a b l i s h s t a n d a r d of
c a r e and c a u s a t i o n i n l e g a l m a l p r a c t i c e c a s e , t h e j u r y
a l l e q e d a c t i o n s and t h i s d e f i . c i e n c y i n p r o o f r e n d e r e d
t h e e v i d c n c e i n s u f f i c i e n t f o r t h e j u r y Lo c o n c l u d e t . h a t
d i s c o v e r y o r d e r by n o t r i o t i l y i n y d e f e n d a n t s i t would
o f f e r e x p e r t o p i n i o n t-estimony t h a t t h c blood s p l . a t t e r
e v i d e n c e was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e d e f e n d a n t s ' g u i l t as
c h a r g e d , which was b a s e d on t h e e x p e r t ' s " o b s e r v a t i o n s
on t h e v a r i o u s c o n f i g u r a t i o n s o f b l o o d s p l n t l c r s ,
i n c l u d i n g t h e form, shape a n d ' d i r e c t i o n a l i t y ' of t h e
b l o o d s t a i n s on t h e d e f e n d a n t s ' c l o t h i n g " ) .
28
d e f e n d a n t s were iable). Cf. A t - l a s Tack C o r p . v.
c o u l d n o t e s t a b l i s h t.he a p p l i c a b l e z t a n d a r d s of t h e
e n g i n e e r i n y p r o f e s s i o n , and t h e r e f o r e , "the p l a i n t i f f
had no r e a s o n a b l e e x p e c t a t i o n of p r o v i n g i t s c a s e " ) .
The D e f e n d a n t was c h a r y e d w i l h m o t o r v e h j c l e
Commonwealth was r e q u i r e d t o p r o v e f o u r e s s e n t i a l
p u b l i c way, ( 3 ) n e g l . i q e n t l y s o a s to e n d a n g e r human l i f e
or safety, (4) t h c r e b y c a u s i n g t h e d e a t h aL a p e r s o n .
b e p r o v e n hy t h e c r i m i n a l s t a n d a r d o f "beyond a
415, 417 ( 1 9 9 0 ) .
29
I n t h i s case, t h e p a r t i e s s t i p u l a t e d t h a L t h e
t h e d i s p u t e d e l e m c n t s a t t r i a l were w h e t h e r t h e
a c c i . d e n t , a n d w h e t h e r he d i d s o n e g l i g e n t l y . (R.H.
i n t e r i t i o n a l l y m a n i p u l a t e s some m e c h a n i c a l o r e l e c t r i c a l
p a r t of t h e v e h i d e . . . " Model J u r y I n s t r u c t i o n f o r
t h e District C o u r t 3 . 0 6 ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) , c i t i n g
d e f i n e d n e g l i g e n c e a s follows:
Negliycrice, w i t h o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n a n d i n it.s
o r d i n a r y sense, i s t h e i a i l u r e of a r e s p o n s i b l e
p e r s o n , e i t h e r by o m i s s i o n o r b y a c t i o n , t o
exerci,se t h a t deyrce of c a r e , vigi.1.ance and
f o r e t h o u y k t which, i n t h e d i s c h a r q e of t h e d u t y
t.hen r e s t i n g 0 1 1 h i m , thc p e r s o n o f o r d i n a r y
cauLion a n d p r u d e n c e o u q h t t o e x e r c i s e under t h e
particul.ar circumstances.
Id.
- a t 591.
"'By the yrcaL weight of authority a sudden and
31
w h e t h e r t h e e v i t i e n c c , viewed i n a l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e
t o t h e Commonwealth, c o u l d l e a d a n y rat.iona1 t r i e r o f
c o n t r o l l i n y a n d d i d c o n t r o l . h i . s c a r a t t k c L i m e of t h e
accident. A s d i s c u s s e d below, t h e e v i d e n c e d i d n o t m e e t
been allowed.
T h e Commonwealth’s t h e o r y o f t h e c a s e was t h a t ” t h e
n e q l i q e n c e i r i L h i s m a t t e r i.s t h a t I t k c d e f e n d a n t ] was
and h c c r o s s e d o v e r t h e y e l l o w l i n e s , a c r o s s t h e s t r e e t
i t s c l o s i n g a r g u m e n t , t h e Commonwcalth a l s o i m p r o p e r l y
a r g u e d w i t h o u t a n y s u p p o r t i n Lhe e v i d e n c e t h a t ,
be c a u s e o f t h e p u r po r t c d l y ” s p i d e r e d w i n d s h i e 1d “ a n d
t h e b l o o d a n d s a l i v a on t h e a i r b a g , “ w c know” t h e
person h a v i n q a s c i z u r e d o e s n o t s i t u p . ” (R.A. 9 3 3 -
32
937, 939-940).
Finally, t h e Commonwealth c o n t e n d e d t h a t t h e
a b s e n c e of evj-dence of a s e i z u r e i r i D e f e n d a n t ' s m e d i c a l
records ( i. e . , p o s t - a c c i d e n t t e s l i n y ) and c e r t a i n
i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s in h i s symptoms a f Lcr t h e a c c i d e n t
920-928).
T h e a b o v e - d e s c r i b e d e v i d e n c e t.ends t.o e q u a l l y
q u e s L i o n of g u i l t on t h i s e v i d e n c e would n e c e s s a r i l y
r e q u i r e s p e c u l a t i o n a n d c o n j e c t u r e , and i m p e r m i s s i b l y
s h i f t s t h e burden of p r o o f t o t h e D e f e n d a n t .
1. Speediriy a n d C r o s s i n g Yellow L j . n e .
miles-per-hour, c r o s s e d t h e y e l l o w l i n e , and f a i l e d t o
brake b e f o r e c r a s h i . n g w e r e evidericc of n e g l i g e n c e i f ,
"operating" t h e c a r when t h e s e c o n d i L i o n s o c c u r r e d .
The t r i a l c o u r t h a d p r e v i o u s l y h e l d d u r i n g t h e t r i a l
t h a t t.he Commonwealth c o u l d n o t a r g u e t h a t t h e Defendant
was r e a c h i n g f o r a d r i n k o r h i s c e l l phone a t t h e t i m e
of t h e a c c i d e n t b e c a u s e t h e r e was n o f a c t u a l b a s i s Lor
t h a t argument i n t . h e e v i d e n c e . ( R . A . 1060-1061).
33
However, b a s e d on t h e e v i d e n c e e l i c i . t e d f r o m t h e
Commoriwcalth' s own w i t n e s s e s , it w a s e q u a l l y l i k e l y
2. The Rlond a n d S a l i v a on A i r b a g
A s a r g u e d a b o v e , t h e Commonwealth's f a i l u r e Lo
p r e s e n t any expert w i t n e s s q u a l i f i e d i n s p l a t t e r
e v i d e n c e s h o u l d p r e c l u d e a n y r e a s o n a b l e i n f e r e n c e s from
b e i n g drawn r e g a r d i n g t h e presence o f b l o o d a n d s a l i v a
on t h e a i r b a g . However, i f t h i s Court. c o n s i d e r s C h i s
T h e CommonwealLh's r e b u t t a l w i t n e s s , D r . H o c h ,
t . e s t i f i e d t h a t a s e i z u r e would h a v e r e n d e r e d t h e
D e f e n d a n t u n a b l e Lo c o n t r o l h j . s c a r , and i f t h e
I l e f e n d a n t ' s f o o t was on t h e a c c e l e r a t o r d u r i n g t h e
t o n i c p o r t i o n o f a t o n i c - c 1 . o n i c s e i z u r e , it w o u l d h a v e
c a u s e d h i m t o d e p r e s s t h e a c c e l e r a t o r f o r 10-20
s e c o n d s , which comports d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e f o r e n s i c
evidence presented i n t h i s case. (K.A. 8 8 " / - 8 8 8 ) .
13
The manner i.n w h i c h t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d was
c o m p l e t e l y i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the D c i e n d a n t ' s n o r m a l
drivi.nq h a b i t s . D e f e n d a n t ' s f o r m e r pol i c e p a r t r i e r ,
O f f i c e r David C o s t a , h a d s i g n i f i c a n t . e x p e r i e n c e
p a C r o l l i n g w i t . h the D e f e n d a n t a n d o b s e r v i n g h i s
driving habits. O f f i c e r C o s t a u s e d Lo j o k i n g t e l l the
Defendant t h a t he "drove l i k e an o l d lady" because he
drove so s l o w l y , and h e d e s c r i b e d t h e Defendant as a
"very c a u t i o u s and c a r e f u l d r i v e r . " (R.A. 509-510).
34
evidence, i t still i s i n s u f f i c i e n t t o p r o v e t h e
Defendant w a s s i t t i n y up d u r i n g i m p a c t . 1 4
T h e c r i t i c a l i n q u i r y i s w h e t h e r t h e r e was l e g a l l y
s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r t h e jury t o c o n c l u d e beyond a
on t h e a i r b a g . S t a l e d d i f f e r e n t . l y , was t h e r e l e g a l l y
e x p l a n a t i o n f o r how Chey g o t t h e r e a f t e r t h e c r a s h ?
The e v i d e n c e r e g a r d i n g when t . h e b l o o d a n d s a l i v a
werc p l a c e d on t h e a i r b a g was e n t i r e l y c i r c u m s t a n t . i a 1
l i k e l y i n f e r e n c e t h a t t h e y were t r a n s f e r r e d t h e r e a f t e r
thc a c c i d e n t i n 1 i q h t o f t h e numerous o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r
35
t h a t t h e D e f e n d a n t was b l e e d i n g and d r o o l i n y f r o m h i s
mouth a f t e r t . h e c r a s h . Moreover, m e d i c a l r e c o r d s
l a c e r a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g s u p e r f i c i a l c u t s on his h a n d s .
and t r y i n g t o s i t up i n t h e c a r a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t , and
o v e r h i s b l e e d i n y a n d d r o o l i n g mouth. I n f a c t , Michael
C a s s o l a t e s t i f i e d t h a t h e was “ c h a s i n g [ t h e D e f e n d a n t ]
a r o u n d w i t h t h e oxyqen b e c a u s e h e k e p t movj.ng a n d
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e Defendant was p l a c e d on a
backboard w h i l e s t i l l i n s i d e t h e c r u i s e r and t h e n
by t h e d e p l o y e d a i r b a g , and t h e b l o o d a n d s a l i v a c o u l d
e a s i l y h a v e b e e n d e p o s i t e d a t t h a t timc b y t h e Defendant
a i r b a g i s j u s t s e v e r a l s m a l l s p l a t . t . e r e d d r o p s ( s c e R.A.
b e more c o n s i s t c n t w i t h t h e D e f e n d a n t ‘ s face b e i n g i n
36
d i r e c t c o n t a c t w i t h t h e a i r b a y nL i m p a c t . 1 5
inore l i k e l y
~ - t h a t t h e b l o o d and s a l i v a on t h e a i r b a g
were L r a n s L c r r c d t h e r e a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t d u r i n y all t h e
p o s t - c r a s h a c t i v i ty.'16
the Commonwealth's a c c j d e n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t , r e f u t e d
c a r " c o n t i n u e d on t h e s C r a i g h t p a t h o f t h e r o a d and
( 3 ) a s h a r p and s u d d e n t u r n a t defendant.'^ c o n f i r m e d
roadway, and y e t , s h e d i d n o t f i n d a n y e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e
Defendant t r i e d t o s t e e r o u t of L h c way b e f o r e c r a s h i n y
u n d i s p u t e d absence o f s k i d m a r k s r e n d e r t h e t e s t i m o n y
i n f c r e n c e s t h e Commonwealth u r g e s h s c d on t h i s
i n a c c u r a t e t e s t i m o n y arc unreasonable a s c o n t r a r y t o t h e
( i n f e r e n c e s m u s t be r e a s u n a b l e a n d p o s s i b l e ) .
Moreover, e v e n i f t h e j u r y d i s r e q a r d e d M r . K e l s e y ' s
t h a t i s i n s u f f i c i e n t t o s u s t a i n Che Commonwealth's
38
428 Mass. at. 1 9 7 ( e v i d e n c e i s n o t s u f f i c i e n L t o overcome
a m o t i o n f o r a r e q u i . r e d f i n d i n q u n l e s s i t "allows [ a n
a p p e l l a t e c o u r t ] t o d o more t h a n ' f i n d t h a t t h e r e w a s
some r e c o r d e v i d e n c e , however s l i g h t . , t o s u p p o r t e a c h
t e s t - i m o n y t h a t i y n u r e s and o v e r L l y c o n t r a d i c t s t h e known
laws of p h y s i c s .
C o n t r a r y t o t h e Commonwealth's s u g g e s t i o n , t h i s i s
i l l o g i c a l defense t h e o r y w i t h o u t any f a c t u a l b a s i s i n
s e i z u r e o r some o t k c r d e b i l i t a t i n g medj.cal c o n d i t i o n
i m m e d i a t e l y p r i o r Lo t h e c r a s h i s a c t u a l l y c o r r o b o r a t c d
For i n s t a n c e , M r . K c l s c y t e s t i f i e d t . h a t t h e r e w a s
by him i m m e d i a t e l y b e f o r e t h e c r a s h . T h i s was t h e o n l y
d i r e c t t e s t i m o n y on t h i s c r i t i c a l i s s u e , and t h e
39
Commonwealth d i d n o t o f f e r a n y c o n t r a r y t e s t i m o n y f r o m
any of t h e o t h e r e y e w i t n e s s e s t o t h e a c c i d e n t .
no o p e r a t o r i n p u t f o r t h e 11.4 scconds b e f o r e t h e
i n v e s t i g a t e d , t h e r e were o n l y t e n c a s e s w h e r e t h e r e w a s
s i m i l a r l y no aLLempt by t h e o p e r a t o r t o e v a d e t h e
t h o s e t e n a c c i d e n t s (i.c., s l e e p i n g d r i v e r , d r u g o r
S c r g e a n t Ryan's s i g n i f i c a n t e x p e r i e n c e in a c c i d e n t
anoma1.y. ( R . A . 647-648).
(which c a n be e x p l a i n e d by t h e s e i z u r e ) , S e r g e a n t Ryan
a n y t h i n g i n a p p r u p r i a l e a t t h e time t h a t [ h i s v e h i c l e 1
40
f a c t , y i v e r i the constellation of factors she found in
41
(R.A. 8 8 2 ; emphasis added)
'To t h e e x t e n t t h e Conunonwcalth a r g u e s t h a t t h e r e
was n o c o r r o b o r a t i n g m e d i c a l e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e
Defendant suiicred a s e i z u r e , t h i s i s n o t
dispositive." D r . Hoch t e s t i f i e d on d i r e c t e x a m i n a t i o n
t h a t a b o u t 30%-50% of t h e t i m e , d o c t o r s d o n o t f i . n d a
c a u s e for a s e i z u r e , and b a s e d on h i s r e v i e w of t h e
(R.A. 8 4 5 , 855; e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , on
s u f f e r s a s e i z u r e , i n p a r L i c u l a r a f i r s t . o n e , t h e r e may
n o t be a n y i d e n t i f i a b l e m e d i c a l e v i d c n c c a f t e r w a r d s .
i n t . 0 an emergency room w i t h a f i r s t s e i z u r e , it
42
expert's testimony negates any significance the
43
Berl^y, 393 Mass. a t 799-800.
I L i s c l e a r from t h e D i s c o v e r y NoLice t h a t t h e
t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r p l a n n e d t o a r g u e t h a t t h e damage t o t h e
t h a t . h e had formed t h i s t h e o r y b c f o r e o r d u r j n g h i s p r e -
L r i a l i n t e r v i e w w i t h S e r q e a n t Ryan on March 7 , 7 0 0 8 .
of S c r g e a n t Ryan - h i s own a c c i d e n t r e c o n s t r u c t i o n i s t -
w h e t h e r there was a n y e v i d e n c e in s u p p o r t o f h i s
1s
i n t e n d e d theory. I f t h e t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r had i n q u i r e d
44
on t h i s s u b j e c t , he would h a v e l e a r n e d n o t o n l y t h a t
t h e r e was no e v i d e n c e Lo s u p p o r t h i s t h e o r y , b u t i n
“ i n d u c e d ” by t h e f o r c e of t h e c r a s h and i t w a s p o s s i b l e
I t i s a l s o u n d i s p u t e d t h a t t.he t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r
c o m p l e t e l y a v o i d e d t h e s u b j e c t s of t h e w i n d s h i e l d a n d
t h e b l o o d a n d s a l i v a on the a i r b a y d u r i n g t h e
e v i d e n t i a r y p h a s e of L r i a l . (R.A. 1141-1142; SJ T r .
23). I n d e e d , t h e t r j . a l j u d g e acknowledged t h a t . t h e
t r i a l p r o s e c u t o r n e v e r a s k e d any q u e s t i o n s o f t h e
w i t n e s s e s a b o u f t h e w i n d s h i e l d o r t h e blood and s a l i v a
t h e c o u r t r e a s o n e d t - h a t “ m a y b e [Lhc prosecutor] w a s
The t r i a l c o u r t ’ s r e a s o n i n g and r u l i n q a r e
4s
completely c o n t r a r y t o t h e b l a c k l e t t e r a n d s p i r i t of
P r o f e s s i o n a l ConclucL. Rule 3 . 0 ( j ) p r o v i d e s t h a t a
e v i d c n c e b e c a u s e t h e p r o s e c u L o r b e l i e v e s i t w i l l damage
r e s p o n s i - b i l i t y oi a m i n i s t e r of j u s t i c e and n o t si.mply
C r o s s - e x a m i n a t i o n i s Lhe most. u s e f u l t o o l i n o u r
p r o s c c u f o r t o p u r p o s e f u l l y a v o i d a c r i t i c a l a r e a of
i n q u i r y t o p r o t e c t h i s w i t - n e s s e s from a r i g o r o i l s c r o s s -
c x a m i n a t i on i s tarilamuunt. t o s u p p r e s s i n g t h e t r u t h . The
46
e s t a h .she, p r i n c i G 3 ha 1\
p r o s e ct: J r s a r e .Id Lo I
h e k n e w t h e r e w a s no e v i d e n t i a r y s u p p o r t i n t r o d u c e d a t
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h o Commonwealth d i s c 1 o s e d d u r i n g o r a l
argurricnL b e f o r e the S i n q l e J u s t i c e t i i a L i t d i d n o t a s k
b e c a u s e i t s witnesses were n o t q u a l , i f i e d t u t e s f i f y
e v i d e n c e d u r i n g h j s clo:;ing were u n s u p p o r t e d a n d h i y h l y
improper. Having n o t h i n y tu l o s e b e c a u s e t h e
t h e r e b y f o r c i n g Ciefendant t o move f o r a m i s t r i a l .
was e q r e q i o u s a n d r i s e s t o t.he l e v e i 01 m i s c o n d u c t
47
warrant ig di n t cha aga1 ;t Lh
48
woefully insu .cienL remedy t o o f f s e t . t h e
Commonwealth's b l a t a n t f a i l u r e Lo u p h o l d i t s f u n d a m e n t a l
f u n c t i o n o f s e a r c h i n g Lor Lhe t r u t h , w h i c h d e p r i v e d
Defendant o f h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t t o a f a i r t r i a l .
CONCLUSION
For a l l t h e a b o v e - s t a t e d r e a s o n s , t h e D e f e n d a n t
r e s p e c t f u l l y r e q u e s t s t h a t . t h i s Honorable C o u r t : (1)
r e v e r s e t h e t r i a l c o u r t ' s o r d e r d e n y i n g h i s Motion f o r a
o f c o n v i c t j o n ; and ( 3 ) d i r e c t t h e t r i a l court t o e n t e r a
A1 L c r n a t i v e l y , t h e Defendant r e s p e c t f u 1 ly r e q u e s t s
convicLion: a n d ( 7 ) d i r e c t t h c t r i a l c o u r t to eriLcr a n
t h e D e f e n d a n t a s an a p p r 0 p r i a t . e s a n c t i o r i a n d d e t e r r e n t
49
Respectfully submitted,
S'I'UAHT MERRY,
By his attorneys,
L . A # L F
Carlene A . P e n n e l l , BBO#6 1175