Appeals court hears sufficiency challenge in involuntary manslaughter convictions from single-vehicle crash

Defense counsel argued the evidence against the defendant in the Worcester single-vehicle collision was insufficient to sustain convictions for involuntary manslaughter and motor-vehicle reckless homicide, and that the latter conviction was duplicative. Counsel asked the panel to examine the sequence on video evidence and tire-mark analysis showing an oversteer event occurring on a straightaway, and contended that intervening facts — the defendant’s reentry into the correct lane and subsequent loss of control after a bump — broke proximate causation.
The Commonwealth responded that, taken in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, there was ample evidence of wanton and reckless conduct: drag racing at high speed in a 30–35 mph zone, traveling in the wrong lane and returning to the lane before losing control, and a collision that shattered windows and embedded glass in a tree. The Commonwealth urged that those facts supported the jury’s findings and that, under controlling precedent, the convictions should be upheld; it conceded the motor-vehicle homicide count might be duplicative under recent SJC guidance and noted any duplicative count can be vacated as required.
The panel pressed counsel on distinctions among precedent and on how to evaluate recklessness versus gross negligence, and the case was submitted for decision.