Commonwealth v. Hinds

927 N.E.2d 1009 (2010)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D lived with his eighty-seven-year-old mother. The mother had a broken hip and D asked his sister, Melo, if their mother could stay with her because he was going to have heart bypass surgery. The mother remained at Melo's house until October 8, 1998. On October 1, Warren and his wife, Mary, arrived from California to stay at Melo's house for a few days before visiting Warren's relatives in Canada. Warren was D's half-brother. On October 3, Warren, Mary, and Melo went to the mother's house to retrieve the mother's telephone and some of her clothes. They did not have a key to the mother's first-floor apartment, and no one was home, so Warren opened the door by 'picking' the lock. That evening, Warren sent an e-mail to D, stating: 'Since you refused Ma's admission to her own home and have taken it upon yourself not to allow her access to her possessions at her convenience, i.e. cordless phone and clothing, and since I have 'durable power of attorney,' I am exercising my rights of 'durable power of attorney,' I am putting the house up for sale in one week's time. Since she does not have access to her own home at her convenience, there's no need to have the house.' Warren wrote that D would have a right of first refusal to purchase the property. D spoke with a Cambridge police officer and reported that Warren had attempted to break into his mother's apartment. D applied for and obtained a temporary protective order which ordered Warren not to abuse or contact D, to stay at least one hundred yards away from him, and to stay away from their mother's residence. While Melo was at work, D, with his brother Charles, took their mother out to lunch and brought her back to her own house, where she remained until the killings on October 16. On October 16, Warren, Mary, and Melo went together to attend the hearing to determine whether the temporary protective order would become permanent. D appeared pro se. The judge ordered the protective order dismissed. After the hearing, Warren, Mary, and Melo stood on the corner one block away from the mother's house, waiting for the police to arrive to assist them in entering the house so they could bring the mother to Melo's house. No police officer arrived, so Melo decided to go into the house alone and pick up her mother. Warren and Mary waited at the corner. D went outside to his automobile to find cigarettes he kept in the trunk. He observed Warren and Mary at the corner, saw his gun in the trunk, concealed the gun in a briefcase that was also in the trunk, and returned to the house carrying the briefcase. When Melo arrived at the house, D was in the doorway and asked her what she was doing there. She said she was there to see her mother, and he allowed her inside. Melo spoke with her mother in the kitchen and explained that she had been at the courthouse because of the protective order. The mother said that D's former wife had told her that D got a protective order because Warren had hit him. Melo said, 'I was there; nothing happened.' D said, 'Oh, yeah?' pulled a gun from his sweater vest, and shot her in the head from six to seven feet away. When she tried to move, he told her, 'Stay down, or I'll shoot you again.' D then left the house, walked to the corner, and fired two shots at Mary, striking her twice in the head. He then shot Warren in the head and back. Mary died that day; Warren died from his gunshot wounds on October 23. D then walked past Kevin Christie, who had been delivering a package and heard the gunshots. After Christie spoke to D, D replied, 'They'll probably fry my ass now.' Christie told him, 'No, you could say self-defense.' D said, 'Yeah, right,' and 'kind of chuckled' as he walked past Christie. D then dialed 911 and said, 'I hope they're dead.' While on the telephone with the dispatcher, the defendant said to Melo, 'I wish I could have killed you, Patty.' D said he would be standing outside in front of the house waiting for a police officer. A forensic psychologist testified that at the time of the shootings, D suffered from a mental illness that caused him to lack substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform his behavior to the requirements of law. The Commonwealth called a forensic psychiatry, who offered the opinion that D did not suffer from a mental disease on the date of the shootings, and was able to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct and to conform his conduct to the requirements of law. D was convicted and appealed in part on the failure of the court to instruct the jury on voluntary manslaughter.