Commonwealth vs. John J. Harrington

Summary

The court held that Massachusetts law did not authorize imposing a death sentence for the murder at issue, because restoring a mandatory death penalty after the intervening constitutional ruling would be impermissibly retroactive and could not be judicially reconstructed from the existing statutes. It nevertheless affirmed the defendant's convictions because the trial judge's capital-punishment-based exclusion of five prospective jurors, although erroneous, was not clearly foreclosed and did not deprive the defendant of a fair and impartial jury. The court also found no basis under its plenary review authority to disturb the conviction.