Commonwealth v. DiRenzo
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
At their first trial, the defendants were convicted by a jury of delinquency by reason of second degree murder. This court reversed those convictions based upon our conclusion that “[t]he inclusion of the words ‘or serious bodily injury’ or like language in the so-called third prong of malice instruction is error.” Commonwealth v. DiRenzo, 44 Mass. App. Ct. 95, 99 (1997). After retrial in the Juvenile Court, a jury again returned delinquency verdicts of murder in the second degree against both defendants. We reject the defendants’ several claims of error and affirm the judgments of conviction.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. LatimoreMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Commonwealth v. GreyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1987
- Commonwealth v. McLeodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
- Santiago v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
- Santiago v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.