Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Defense urges reversal over jury instructions as high court reviews highway-shooting convictions
Summary
At oral argument before the Supreme Judicial Court, defense lawyers for three men convicted in a highway shooting urged reversal or reduced sentences, challenging jury instructions and the sufficiency of evidence for premeditation and "extreme atrocity." The Commonwealth defended the convictions, citing video, DNA and roughly 20 rounds fired into the victim's truck.
The Supreme Judicial Court heard competing arguments on appeals from three convictions arising from a November 2019 highway shooting, where a Honda Accord approached a Ford F-150 and occupants of the Accord fired multiple rounds into the truck.
Attorney Dana Kerhan, arguing for Isaiah Fratascelli, told the court, "There were 3 guns in the car, and there were 4 people in the car," and urged the justices not to infer his client was a shooter when the record ties two recovered firearms to other occupants and offers no direct evidence Fratascelli possessed a gun. Kerhan argued the configuration of the vehicle and the ballistic pattern left material doubt that Fratascelli knowingly participated in the shooting.
The defense focused heavily on jury-instruction and sufficiency issues. Attorney Suzanne Renaud, representing Keith Cotto, centered her argument on what she described as an erroneous intent instruction that "never really give[s] any clarification" and that conflated "intent to kill" with "knowingly participate," potentially lowering the Commonwealth's burden. Renaud said the…
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
