Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court hears challenge to juror seating and sufficiency of evidence in Commonwealth v. Rosa
Summary
Defense counsel argued juror 37 equivocated about bias and that the evidence did not prove constructive possession; the Commonwealth said the juror gave direct answers and the record allowed a permissible inference that the defendant exercised dominion over the gun.
BOSTON — On Jan. 14, 2026, a state appeals court heard arguments in Commonwealth v. Rosa, where the defendant challenged his conviction on two grounds: the seating of a juror who, defense counsel said, equivocated during voir dire, and the sufficiency of evidence for constructive possession of a firearm.
Defense attorney Kevin DeMello told the three-judge panel that juror number 37 repeatedly gave equivocal answers when asked about bias stemming from a background of trusting law enforcement and military authority. DeMello said those responses — including…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
