SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3. The Commonwealth may not misuse evidence admitted for a limited purpose or refer to "facta" which were not admitted at trial in its cloaing argument. The Commonwealth's misuse of evidence introduced for a limited purpose is error and may create a substantial risk of unfair prejudice. See, e.q., Commonwealth v. Rosa, 412 Mass. 147, 157 (1992). Prosecutors must limit their arguments "to facts in evidence and inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence." Commonwealth v. Coren, 437 Mass. 723, 731 (2002). 4. Standard of review. The trial court's determination of whether evidence is relevant and, if so, whether it is more probative than prejudicial, is reviewed for "palpable error. Commonwealth v. Talbot, 444 Mass. 586, 589 n.2 (2005). In adjudicating a claim of error during the Commonwealth's closing argument, a reviewing court considers: (1) whether the defendant seasonably objected; (2) whether the error was limited to collateral issues or went to the heart of the case; (3) what specific ox general instructions the judge gave the jury which may have mitigated the mistake; and (4) whether the error, in the circumstances, possibly made a difference in the jury's conclusions. Commonwealth v. Perez, 444 Mass. 143, 151 ( 2005). C. Application of Law to Pacts. 1. The sex evidence was inadmissible. 22
Prior to trial, the Commonwealth managed to convince the court to admit explosive evidence sullying the defendant's character on a false premise. Desperately seeking admission of such evidence, the prosecutor characterized it as demonstrating a Ilhostile relationship" probative of motive. D. (1/25/01)/39-40. Yet the plethora of evidence regarding Greineder's extramarital sexual activities (and use of an alias in connection with those activities) admitted at trial did not provide any link in a chain of evidence proving that the defendant had a motive to murder his wife. There was no evidence introduced to suggest that Ms. Greineder intended to leave Greineder, nor was there any evidence of hostility between the two. Hence, the sex evidence was simply not relevant and should have been excluded. Even if Greineder's extramarital sexual activity had some conceivable relevance on the issue of motive, any probative value was far outweighed by the resulting unfair prejudice. Evidence that Greineder was involved in extramarital sexual activity, including the use of prostitutes, group sex, and sadomasochism, was a transparent attack on his character. Tf Greineder could lead this secret, repulsive double life, couldn't he also have secret, repulsive plans to murder his wife? That implicit suggestion permeated the Commonwealth's case, 23
Page 1 and 2: NORFOLK. ss. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSAC
Page 3 and 4: 3. Greineder's direct testimony. .
Page 5 and 6: VI. VII. d. Greineder is entitled t
Page 7 and 8: 4 . Counsel's failure to move to su
Page 9 and 10: Miller v. Harvey, 566 F.2d 879 (4th
Page 11 and 12: Commonwealth v. Carter, 39 Mass. Ap
Page 13 and 14: Commonwealth v. Martinez, 425 Mass.
Page 15 and 16: FitzDatrick v. Allen, 410 Mass. 791
Page 17 and 18: STATEMENT OF THE CASE Dirk K. Grein
Page 19 and 20: First of all, we are in Room 8. The
Page 21 and 22: logistical reasons for closure.3 As
Page 23 and 24: inculpatory DNA test results linkin
Page 25 and 26: testified that Greineder could not
Page 27 and 28: This Court held in Bmmonwealth v. N
Page 29 and 30: of his Miranda rights. a. at 112-12
Page 31 and 32: up Ms. Greineder . Greineder replie
Page 33 and 34: waives that right and makes volunta
Page 35 and 36: that Greineder had never mentioned
Page 37: they render the trial fundamentally
Page 41 and 42: gets to that point [i.e., to commit
Page 43 and 44: States, 17 F.2d 973, 976 (5th Cir.
Page 45 and 46: 399 Mass. 17, 21 n.5 (1987). In Gal
Page 47 and 48: 1. Rebeiro's trial testimony was fa
Page 49 and 50: As noted above, many jurisdictions
Page 51 and 52: deliberations. Judge Chernoff is co
Page 53 and 54: where the jury had experimented wit
Page 55 and 56: jury, if “a judge learns that a j
Page 57 and 58: consideration of the factors outlin
Page 59 and 60: moments" of insight, which "helped"
Page 61 and 62: Commonwealth v. Curnin, 409 Mass. 2
Page 63 and 64: In evaluating a claim of ineffectiv
Page 65 and 66: DNA test results withstands scrutin
Page 67 and 68: In any event, if filing such a moti
Page 69 and 70: subject to exclusion on that ground
Page 71 and 72: esults were effectively unchallenge
Page 73 and 74: emains unrebutted, and Dr. Brenner'
Page 75 and 76: precisely what the Constitution pro
Page 77 and 78: A search warrant for a residence co
Page 79 and 80: circumatances, the court could prop
Page 81: process can arise from a combinatio

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?