SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

More documents

Recommendations

Info

would have been different had the evidence regarding the towel been suppressed. The Commonwealth's case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, and Greineder's testimony about the towel was the linchpin of the DNA transfer theory presented by the defense at trial. Testimony by Detective McDermott that the towel produced by Greineder was not the one observed in Greineder's vehicle during the search devastated Greineder's credibility by making him appear dishonest. Further, it completely undermined the defense's DNA transfer theory, making it look more like a concoction supported by fabricated evidence than a reasonable explanation of the otherwise-damning DNA test results. Greineder suffered substantial prejudice and i s entitled to relief. X. THE CUMULATIVE ERRORS JUSTIFY REVERSAL OF GREINEDER'S CONVICTION. A. Summary of Applicable Law. Under M.G.L.c. 278, 533E, this Court must consider "whether there was an error in the course of the trial (by defense counsel, the prosecutor, or the judge) 'I that creates a "substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice." Commonwealth v. Wrisht, 411 Maso. 678, 681 (1992). In examining the record, the Court may take into account the combined prejudicial effects of individual errors. a, u, Commonwealth v. Baker, 440 Mass. at 519. Similarly, a violation of the federal right to due 64
process can arise from a combination of circumstances which individually might not warrant relief. United States v. SamDson, 335 F.Supp.2d 166, 183 (D.Mass. 2004). E. Application of Law to Facts. This first degree murder trial was beset by serious errors from start to finish. Due to the combined effect of myriad mistakes by the trial court, defense counsel, the prosecutor, the Commonwealth's witnesses, and even the jury, Dirk Greineder was deprived of constitutional due process, and his resulting murder conviction cannot be deemed €air or just. Relief is warranted. CONCLUSION The defendant's conviction should be reversed or vacated, and the case remanded for a new trial. Respectfully submitted, DIRK GREINEDER By his attorneys, James L. Sultan, BBO #488400 Jonathan P. Harwell, BBO #662764 Kankin & Sultan 151 Merrimac Street, Znd Floor Boston, MA 02114 (617) 720-0011 65
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 and 38: they render the trial fundamentally
Page 39 and 40: Prior to trial, the Commonwealth ma
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: circumatances, the court could prop
show all

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?