Commonwealth v. Matos

*344 The defendant was convicted after a jury trial of unarmed robbery ( G. L. c. 265, § 19 [ b ] ) and assault and battery ( G. L. c. 265, § 13A ). On appeal, he argues that evidence he terms in-court and out-of-court identifications was erroneously admitted. He also contends that the judge erred in failing to give a specific unanimity instruction with respect to the unarmed robbery charge. Finally, he contends that various improprieties in the prosecutor's closing argument require reversal of his convictions. We affirm.

Background . We summarize the trial evidence as the jury could have found…