Contact: Beth Stone- (508) 584-8120
BROCKTON – Massachusetts highest court today upheld the First Degree Murder Conviction of a man found guilty of shooting of a taxi cab driver in Brockton, Plymouth County District Attorney Timothy J. Cruz announced today.
On April 15, 2011, a Plymouth County jury found Adilson Neves (DOB: 04/20/90) guilty of Murder in the first degree for the February 16, 2008 homicide of 56-year-old Edward Conley of East Bridgewater. Neves, who was 17-years-old at the time of the shooting, was sentenced to the then-mandatory term of life in prison without parole, and subsequently filed an appeal to the conviction. The SJC issued an opinion today upholding the First Degree Murder conviction.
“Mr. Conley was a hard-working, family man whose murder was senseless and inexcusable,” DA Cruz said. “The SJC’s opinion affirming this conviction helps spare this family from going through an agonizing process all over again.”
Just after midnight on February 16, 2008, Brockton Police responded to a report of a hit and run motor vehicle accident. Upon arrival, they observed a taxicab on the front lawn of 19 Galen Street. The operator of the cab, Mr. Conley, was found lying across the front seat suffering from a gunshot wound to the head. He was transported to Brockton Hospital where he was pronounced dead.
Members of State Police and Brockton Police investigated the murder and interviewed a number of witnesses who identified Neves as the shooter. Neves also told police that an Adidas sneaker found behind at the crime scene belonged to him.
In his argument to the SJC, Neves claimed that failure to suppress statements later admitted into evidence were made involuntarily by him and grand jury testimony by a witness who claimed memory loss should not have been introduced. Neves also argued that testimony by another witness should have been stricken due to violation of a sequestration order and failure to give a requested instruction on involuntary manslaughter.
In their opinion issued today, the SJC held that “while we conclude that some of the defendant’s statements to police were not made voluntarily and should not have been admitted, any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We also conclude that the judge’s rulings with respect to the contested witness testimony and the instruction on involuntary manslaughter were not in error.” ###