BOSTON, April 24, 2012—For the second time in as many years, a Suffolk Superior Court judge has denied a motion for a new trial in the 2005 murder of Sgt. Richard Dever, Suffolk County District Attorney Daniel F. Conley said.

FRANCIS X. LANG (D.O.B. 10/27/74) of Charlestown is currently serving a life term for killing Dever in front of Sullivan’s Pub in Charlestown on March 19, 2005. The victim, a 35-year-old off-duty corrections officer, was one of several people who escorted Lang from the bar just before 12:30 a.m. after the defendant became unruly and aggressive inside; Lang slashed his face and stabbed him four times in the chest, killing him.

Lang fled on foot and was apprehended in a basement crawl space on Elm Street. After a two-week trial in December 2006, he was found guilty of first-degree murder under the theory of extreme atrocity or cruelty and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Jurors deliberated for about three days before rejecting his claim that he acted in self-defense.

In the aftermath of Lang’s conviction, his appellate attorney filed motions for a new trial on two grounds: first, that the courtroom was impermissibly closed during jury selection in violation of his Constitutional right to a public trial, and second, that his trial attorney was ineffective for not pursuing an insanity defense instead of the self-defense claim used at trial.

“We argued against these motions because they had no foundation in the proceedings or the law,” Conley said. “They were attempts to get another bite at the apple after the facts and the evidence proved this defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

In January 2011, Judge Stephen Neel – the trial judge – denied the former motion after an evidentiary hearing in which he heard testimony from the defendant’s sister and trial attorney and listened to recorded interviews with three court officers assigned to the proceedings. Neel found that the defendant’s sister was instructed to leave the courtroom briefly so prospective jurors could be interviewed, but that “the exclusion was ‘so trivial or ‘de minimis’ that it falls entirely outside the range of ‘closure’ in the constitutional sense,” he said, quoting 2010 Supreme Judicial Court decision.

“No court officer state that the courtroom was ‘closed,’ either temporarily or for the entire impanelment,” Neel wrote in his Jan. 31, 2011, decision. “[T]here was no sign to that effect; no officer was posted at the courtroom entrance to keep the public out; the courtroom entrance was unlocked; when seats became available, [the defendant’s sister], her party, and members of the public likely would have been admitted.”

Suffolk Superior Court Judge Patrick Brady, who took the second motion after Judge Neel retired, denied the motion in a ruling issued Friday and received by Conley’s office this morning. It was based on testimony from Lang’s trial attorney, Robert Sheketoff; a psychologist retained by Lang’s appellate attorney; and another psychologist retained by the Commonwealth.

Calling Sheketoff “a very able, experienced, and highly regarded defense attorney,” Brady recounted the defendant’s strategy at trial.

“The defendant’s explanation to Mr. Sheketoff for his conduct at the time of the homicide was that he was attacked by several patrons of the bar and was defending himself,” Brady wrote. “Mr. Sheketoff felt that this was a viable defense which was supported by at least one independent witness …. [H]e had a firmly held belief that the insanity defense was rarely successful and that the defense should only be raised as a last resort; in other words, when there are no other viable defenses. In this case, Mr. Sheketoff did have a viable defense, namely self defense, which the defendant had articulated to him from the outset and which was supported by [an independent witness].”

Assistant District Attorney Edmond Zabin prosecuted the case at trial and argued against the motions with Assistant District Attorney Jack Zanini, chief of the DA’s Appellate Division. Lang was represented for the motion by attorney Ruth Greenberg.

–30– 

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