Boston Murder Defense Attorney

Few attorneys in Massachusetts have had as much experience handling murder cases as Attorney David R. Yannetti.  He has tried twelve murder cases as lead counsel.  Some of his murder trials have been broadcast on Court TV and other networks from gavel to gavel. 

As a former homicide prosecutor, Attorney Yannetti has learned from first-hand experience how law enforcement officials put a murder case together. He has been called to murder scenes in the middle of the night.  He has personally witnessed how the police preserve evidence, how murder investigations unfold, and what techniques the police use. He has been at police stations when suspects and witnesses have been interrogated and questioned and did formerly, as a prosecutor, plan prosecution strategy. Attorney Yannetti's experience in putting the Commonwealth's cases together now allows him to effectively attack the Commonwealth's cases against his clients.  He knows how things should be done.  He will exploit for his clients any of the prosecution's missteps and/or failures -- mistakes which may have resulted in an unjust charge against his client.  He handles all types of homicide cases, from motor vehicle homicide to manslaughter to first-degree murder cases and federal death-penalty cases.

In a murder case, you have the same defenses that are available to you in every case -- but the stakes are considerably heightened. As a result, an attorney needs to do an extensive amount of investigation and discovery. An attorney must be well-versed in forensic evidence.  He also must be skilled in both the direct and cross examinations of expert witnesses.

Some murder cases are whodunits.  In these cases, a skillful lawyer may able to present an effective alibi defense.  By calling alibi witnesses, or effectively pointing to scientific/forensic/trace evidence, an experienced defense attorney may successfully persuade a jury that his client was somewhere else when the murder occurred.  Even without an affirmative alibi defense, a criminal defense attorney may be able to attack and/or suppress the photo array or lineup identification of the perpetrator.  In so doing, an attorney can argue to the jury that reasonable doubt exists regarding his client's presence at the murder scene.

A murder case may revolve around the issue of self-defense in a mutual combat situation. If a lawyer is successful in creating reasonable doubt as to whether a death was the result of self defense, the accused is entitled to a not guilty verdict.  The Supreme Judicial Court has recently ruled that it is proper in these cases for a criminal defense lawyer to introduce evidence of the murder victim's violent nature or past.

Sometimes it is clear a person committed the crime, but it's also evident that the person was not in his or her right mind when he did it. That scenario may give rise to a "lack of criminal responsibility" defense, commonly known as an “insanity" defense.  Even if a mental disease or defect does not rise to the level of insanity, a person's impaired state of mind may help to convince a judge or jury that the murder charge should be reduced.  For example, a person may have been under extreme stress or some other influence that prevented him from premeditating the crime.  In that case, the charge could be reduced from first degree murder to second degree murder. If a person's mind was impaired to a such a degree that he was unable to form the requisite "malice aforethought," he might be found guilty of manslaughter, which has significantly reduced penalties.

Contact Attorney David R. Yannetti to discuss your rights and possible defenses.

Free Phone Consultation: Contact Boston murder defense attorney David Yannetti.

Sample Murder Case:

March 10, 2008
Middlesex Superior Court
Docket No. 1989-2234
In perhaps the biggest victory of his career -- and after a 3-week trial -- Attorney Yannetti today succeeded in achieving a Not Guilty Verdict for his Client in a First-Degree Murder case. Client was a learning-disabled man who was arrested in 1989 because he signed a detailed typewritten confession to having murdered his next-door neighbor nine years earlier. In 1990, represented by another lawyer, Client was convicted by a jury of 1st-Degree Murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Client languished in state prison for over a decade, with little or no hope of ever winning his freedom. In 2003, his family retained Attorney Yannetti to continue a new investigation into the case begun by another attorney. After an evidentiary hearing, Attorney Yannetti convinced a Superior Court judge that Client should receive a new trial because his former attorney had overlooked exculpatory evidence regarding another suspect. Although the D.A.'s Office appealed that judge's ruling, Attorney Yannetti persuaded the Supreme Judicial Court in 2006 that the ruling was correct. The S.J.C. therefore ordered that Client would indeed receive a new trial -- something that is a very rare event. Attorney Yannetti thereafter petitioned another Superior Court judge to release Client on electronic monitoring, so that he could await his re-trial at home with his 87 year-old mother. Client therefore won his freedom -- albeit restricted to his home -- after unjustly serving 16 years in state prison. Trial then began on February 19, 2008. Attorney Yannetti hired three expert witnesses to testify for the defense: a forensic serologist, a forensic psychologist and the leading expert in the world on false confessions. In addition, Attorney Yannetti unearthed witnesses whom the prosecution had never interviewed. Finally, Attorney Yannetti's star witness was a former police officer who took the report regarding the other, uninvestigated suspect. Today, Attorney Yannetti (along with his sister and co-counsel, Attorney Tanis Yannetti) succeeds in convincing the jury to reject the detailed confession signed by Client. After a hard-fought trial with many twists and turns, Client walks from court a free man for the first time since being convicted 18 years ago. Result: Not Guilty Verdict after a Jury Trial. Client is Released from State Prison after unjustly serving sixteen years.

March 28, 2007
Supreme Judicial Court
Docket No. 2005-9435
Client, represented by another attorney, was convicted in 1990 of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Beginning in 2003, Attorney Yannetti argued in Middlesex Superior Court that Client should be granted a new trial as a result of newly discovered evidence. A Superior Court judge eventually agreed and granted Client a new trial. The District Attorney's Office then appealed that judge's order to the Supreme Judicial Court. After Attorney Yannetti submitted a lengthy brief and orally argued before the full bench, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the Superior Court judge's order and granted a new trial to Client. Attorney Yannetti then succeeded in convincing a different Superior Court judge to order that client be released from state prison after unjustly serving 16 years. Today, granting a final request from Attorney Yannetti, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the District Attorney's Office is required to pay thousands of dollars in attorney's fees to Client, as a result of the Commonwealth's unsuccessful appeal of the original Superior Court judge's ruling. In taking the highly unusual step of awarding attorney's fees to Client, the Supreme Judicial Court specifically noted Attorney Yannetti's "thorough representation" of Client and his "successful result." Result: Client is released from state prison after wrongfully serving 16 years. He also is reimbursed for his attorney's fees so that Attorney Yannetti's representation was essentially "free."