Commonwealth v. Dorsey

Summary

The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the defendant's convictions for first-degree murder on a deliberate-premeditation theory, resisting arrest, and possession of PCP, and affirmed the denial of his motion for a new trial. Reviewing de novo, the court rejected four ineffective assistance claims — concerning trial counsel's investigation of the defendant's PTSD, the victim's history of violent conduct, the victim's PCP use, and expert testimony on the defendant's hand wound — because the defendant failed to show both error and harm, or that any shortfall created a substantial likelihood of a miscarriage of justice under G. L. c. 278, § 33E. The court also declined to reduce the murder verdict, concluding the evidence amply supported deliberate premeditation.