Commonwealth v. Scott
Annotate this CaseDefendant was tried and convicted of murder in the first degree based on a theory of felony-murder, with armed home invasion as the predicate felony. While Defendant’s appeal was pending, he filed a motion for postconviction relief seeking a finding of not guilty on the felony-murder conviction or, in the alternative, a new trial on the murder charge. The trial judge granted a new trial, concluding (1) the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that there had been two separate and distinct assaults; but (2) the jury had not been adequately instructed that to convict Defendant of felony-murder based on the armed home invasion, the jurors were required to find two separate and distinct assaults. Defendant appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support his murder conviction. The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the judge’s order denying the request for a finding of not guilty on the charge of murder in the first degree, with armed home invasion as the predicate felony, holding that the Commonwealth presented evidence that would warrant a finding that Defendant committed two separate assaults, one to support a conviction of armed home invasion and a separate and distinct assault that constituted the homicide.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.