Commonwealth v. Convery, R. Jr., Pet

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• nothing to suggest that circumstances would produce state of passion, anger, fear, fright, or nervous excitement in ordinary person and no indication that defendant subjectively experienced this impassioned state of mind
• no manslaughter instruction warranted where no evidence that defendant “actually, subjectively experienced [an] impassioned state of mind”
• erroneous malice instruction harmless where defense \focused instead on issues of identity and causation\
• erroneous malice instruction harmless where defense “focused instead on issues of identity and causation”
• instructions creating presumption of malice were harmless because evidence did not raise reasonable doubt as to killer’s malice
• “In light of the evidence regarding the nature of the assault on the victim ... the jury’s finding the predicate fact of an unlawful killing was the functional equivalent of their finding the ultimate fact to be presumed, malice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).