In 2023, Kenneth Jose Santana-Rodriguez allegedly fired two gunshots at Irving Sanchez. The incident took place around 7 p.m. at a salon inside the Holyoke Mall.
According to court documents, Santana-Rodriguez was at the salon with Sanchez’s ex-girlfriend.
Sanchez reportedly confronted Santana-Rodriguez, displayed a gun in his waistband, and said “You know what’s about to happen.”
Santana-Rodriguez allegedly drew his own pistol and fired twice at Sanchez. One of those shots killed a salon employee, Trung Tran.
Police arrested Santana-Rodriguez and charged him with first-degree murder.
Santana-Rodriguez claims that he acted in self-defense.
It was unclear to the trial judge if self-defense (or more technically “transferred intent self-defense”) can be used in these circumstances.
Accordingly, he sought clarification from the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC).
The trial judge posed two questions:
The first question is whether transferred intent self-defense an available defense in the Commonwealth?
Here’s the SJC’s answer:
The answer to the first reported question is “Yes.” On appropriate facts, a defendant may assert a claim of transferred intent self-defense to justify the death of an unintended victim, such as an innocent bystander, killed during the lawful exercise of self-defense against an assailant.
The second question asked if the transferred intent self-defense presents a complete defense or only a partial defense?
The SJC gives this answer:
The answer to the second reported question is that transferred intent self-defense presents a partial defense to murder. A murder defendant may be held criminally liable for the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter if the Commonwealth proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant’s exercise of self-defense was wanton or reckless so as to create a high degree of likelihood that substantial harm would result to an unintended victim.
The SJC’s opinion is attached. It includes a proposed model jury instruction based on the ruling.