Court Opinion

ID: 9520620
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 01:45:30.411727+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:46:33.081322
License: Public Domain

Brown, J.
(concurring in the result). I fully agree with the reasoning and result reached with respect to Dutra’s claims of error. There is doubt in my mind, however, whether Shagoury’s trial counsel was well prepared and exercised sound tactical judgment throughout the proceedings below. Shagoury’s counsel chose to ride the coattails of Dutra’s counsel from beginning to end; he attempted no fine-tuning and made no midcourse corrections. I concur, albeit reluctantly, because in view of the “weaknesses in the facts” (Commonwealth v. Satterfield, 373 Mass. 109, 111 [1977]) better lawyering could not possibly have produced a more favorable result. Id. at 115. This case does, however, come close to the situation “where the defense was so botched that judgments on that hypothetical question [i.e., whether better work might have accomplished something material for the defense] would be without value.” Id. A note of caution should be added — defenses that are not foredoomed are entitled to as vigorous a pursuit as is feasible in the circumstances.