BOSTON, Oct. 10, 2012—The state’s highest court today upheld the first-degree murder conviction of a man found guilty of gunning down a rival inside a Roxbury convenience store with surveillance cameras that recorded the incident, Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said.

In a decision written by Chief Justice Roderick L. Ireland, the Supreme Judicial Court found no grounds to overturn the conviction of JOSE DELACRUZ, who was found guilty in 2009 of shooting Tyrice Brown.

On Feb. 7, 2007, Delacruz was caught on video surveillance as he shot Brown four times. Brown died shortly after one of the bullets struck him in the torso and ripped through his lung, liver, intestines and a major artery. The shooting was in retaliation for an incident in January of that year, in which Brown allegedly shot Delacruz in the hand.

Delacruz was identified from a surveillance image by a Boston police officer who had known him for 10 years and attended the same church as Delacruz and members of his family. The defendant was tracked to Wilmington, Delaware, where he was arrested on March 27, 2007.

At trial, Delacruz’s attorney stated that Delacruz had a limited mental capacity and argued that he should be found guilty of second-degree murder.

Among the arguments made in his appeal, Delacruz claimed that a pretrial judge and the trial judge denied his right to his legal counsel of choice by denying a request for a continuance in order for a private attorney to take on the case just two days before the trial was set to begin. The justices found that this decision was within the pretrial judge’s discretion, pointing out the five previous continuances, that the private attorney had cases conflicting with the scheduling of Delacruz’s trial, and that the previously appointed attorney was prepared and capable of representing Delacruz.

“Significantly,” Ireland wrote, “no mention was made at any time that appointed counsel was insufficient in any way or that a problem, as opposed to a mere possible change of mind, constituted the reason of the defendant to seek a change in counsel and, hence, a continuance.”

The trial judge was also within his discretion to deny the defendant’s motion for a new attorney on the first day of trial, Ireland wrote.

Delacruz also argued that statements made to police after his arrest should not have been allowed at trial. He stated that a judge should have taken into consideration Delacruz’s below- normal intelligence when determining whether he had voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and his right to a prompt arraignment before speaking with police.

In the court’s ruling, the justices affirmed that the trial judge took into account the defendant’s mental capacity, as well as his obvious understanding of the legal system, the non-threatening nature of the interview, and other factors in making the decision. The court ruled that the trial judge was right to allow the statements.

The defendant also claimed that the trial judge erred by not repeating instructions to the jury regarding the relevance of Delacruz’s mental impairment. While the jury requested clarification on the definition of premeditation and the differences between first and second degree murder charges, they did not request the same clarification on the role of the defendant’s mental capacity, according to the ruling.

Assistant District Attorney Kris C. Foster of Conley’s Appeals Division argued the case before the SJC. Assistant District Attorney Amy Galatis of the DA’s Homicide Unit prosecuted the case at trial. Charles K. Stephenson argued on Delacruz’s behalf.

–30–

All defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.