Com. v. Vick
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts |
| Writing for the Court | Before HENNESSEY; BRAUCHER |
| Citation | 381 Mass. 43,406 N.E.2d 1295 |
| Decision Date | 01 July 1980 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. James L. VICK. |
Page 1295
v.
James L. VICK.
Decided July 1, 1980.
Page 1296
Sherrill P. Cline, Somerville, for defendant.
Michael J. Traft, Asst. Dist. Atty. (Matthew L. McGrath, Legal Asst. to the Dist. Atty., West Roxbury, with him), for the Commonwealth.
Before HENNESSEY, C. J., and QUIRICO, BRAUCHER, KAPLAN and WILKINS, JJ.
BRAUCHER, Justice.
Pursuant to G.L. c. 278, §§ 33A-33G, the defendant appeals from convictions of murder in the first degree of Johnnie Vick, his brother, of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon on Robert Vick, his uncle, and of unlawful possession of a handgun. There was substantially no dispute that he shot and killed his brother and shot his uncle, and the principal issue at his trial was his criminal responsibility. But inculpatory statements made by him while in custody, bearing on deliberate premeditation as well as on sanity, were admitted in evidence. We hold that the judge's failure, on his own motion, to submit to the jury the issue whether those statements were the product of a rational intellect requires reversal of the convictions.
[381 Mass. 44] There was evidence tending to prove the following facts. The defendant lived in a third floor apartment in a building in Dorchester owned by his uncle. The uncle lived in a first floor apartment and the defendant's brother lived in a second floor apartment. On the morning of Tuesday, December 26, 1977, the defendant entered the building, greeted his uncle and brother, and went up to his apartment. Some time later, in his brother's apartment, the defendant shot his brother three times, killing him. The uncle then got into a car in the driveway, and the defendant went out on the porch and shot his uncle through the windshield, hitting him in the hand.
The prospect of a defense of insanity was fully disclosed in the opening statement to the jury on behalf of the defendant, and the defendant's uncle testified at length to irrational behavior of the defendant during several months preceding the shooting. Thereafter the prosecutor called the defendant's parole officer as a witness, and the parole officer testified to the following. The day after the shooting the defendant called the witness, and the witness and three others went to an apartment where the defendant was staying and took him to the police station. The defendant was booked, given Miranda warnings, and asked if he wished to say anything. He said he would rather talk to his attorney, and the police waited for the attorney to appear. The witness sat next to him and "chatted" with him throughout. At some point the defendant said, "You can only take so much. It was bound to happen." The defendant also said he and his uncle did not get along too well; there was continuous harassment about his not paying his rent. There was no objection or exception to this testimony.
Subsequently, the prosecutor called...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Collins
...jury to disregard the defendant's incriminating statements if they found them involuntary. Commonwealth v. Vick, --- Mass. ---, --- a, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980). See Commonwealth v. Harris, 371 Mass. 462, 358 N.E.2d 982 (1976) (Harris I ). The failure by the judge to give such instructions con......
-
Com. v. Tavares
...inculpatory statements which fall short of a confession." Commonwealth v. Vick, --- Mass. ---, ---, Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1577, 1579, 406 N.E.2d 1295. Commonwealth v. Garcia, 379 Mass. 422, ---, Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 21, 30, 399 N.E.2d 460. Commonwealth v. Fournier, 372 Mass. 346, 348, 361......
-
Com. v. Benoit
...judge lacked any "substantial evidence of the defendant's insanity at the time he made those statements," Commonwealth v. Vick, 381 Mass. 43, 46, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980), there was no live issue before the judge which required the issue to be submitted to the jury. "There is n......
-
Com. v. Vazquez
...583, 593, 402 N.E.2d 55 (1980), quoting Commonwealth v. Marshall, 338 Mass. 460, 461-462, 155 N.E.2d 798 (1959). Commonwealth v. Vick, 381 Mass. 43, --- Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1577, 1579, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980). Commonwealth v. Chung, 378 Mass. 451, 456, 392 N.E.2d 1015 (1979). If the judge de......
-
Com. v. Collins
...jury to disregard the defendant's incriminating statements if they found them involuntary. Commonwealth v. Vick, --- Mass. ---, --- a, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980). See Commonwealth v. Harris, 371 Mass. 462, 358 N.E.2d 982 (1976) (Harris I ). The failure by the judge to give such instructions con......
-
Com. v. Tavares
...inculpatory statements which fall short of a confession." Commonwealth v. Vick, --- Mass. ---, ---, Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1577, 1579, 406 N.E.2d 1295. Commonwealth v. Garcia, 379 Mass. 422, ---, Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 21, 30, 399 N.E.2d 460. Commonwealth v. Fournier, 372 Mass. 346, 348, 361......
-
Com. v. Benoit
...judge lacked any "substantial evidence of the defendant's insanity at the time he made those statements," Commonwealth v. Vick, 381 Mass. 43, 46, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980), there was no live issue before the judge which required the issue to be submitted to the jury. "There is n......
-
Com. v. Vazquez
...583, 593, 402 N.E.2d 55 (1980), quoting Commonwealth v. Marshall, 338 Mass. 460, 461-462, 155 N.E.2d 798 (1959). Commonwealth v. Vick, 381 Mass. 43, --- Mass.Adv.Sh. (1980) 1577, 1579, 406 N.E.2d 1295 (1980). Commonwealth v. Chung, 378 Mass. 451, 456, 392 N.E.2d 1015 (1979). If the judge de......