The Massachusetts Parole Board on Saturday, March 28, 2026 voted to free Michel St. Jean, one of three people convicted in the 2010 killing of pizza delivery driver Richel Nova, while denying parole to fellow defendant Alexander Gallett at the very same hearing. The split decision has reopened old wounds for Nova’s family and put a spotlight on a wave of reviews for long-standing life sentences now eligible for another look.
As reported by the Boston Herald, the board considered records, testimony and parole guidelines before deciding that St. Jean could be released, while Gallett would remain behind bars. The hearing was one of many involving prisoners serving life terms for crimes committed as young adults, a group now getting renewed parole opportunities after recent court rulings.
What the court record shows
According to prosecutors, St. Jean, Gallett and Yamiley Mathurin lured 58-year-old Nova to a vacant house in Hyde Park by ordering pizza, then attacked him once he arrived. Investigators later recovered fingerprints, DNA and other forensic evidence tying the group to the scene, as detailed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The court’s published opinion spells out the calls that brought Nova to the house, the sequence of events and the physical evidence that jurors weighed at trial. The SJC opinion remains the central public legal record of what happened.
Sentencing and aftermath
In 2014, a jury convicted Gallett and St. Jean of first-degree murder, and each received a life sentence. Mathurin pleaded guilty to a lesser charge and was given a shorter term, according to local reports from that time. During sentencing, the court heard emotional victim-impact statements and testimony that emphasized both the brutality of the ambush and the lasting trauma for Nova’s relatives. WCVB documented the original sentencing and the family’s reaction.
Parole board vote and process
The decision to release St. Jean but keep Gallett locked up shows how two people tied to the same crime can end up on very different paths once their cases reach the Parole Board. Outcomes hinge on the specific evidence in each file, the person’s conduct and rehabilitation behind bars, and the board’s read on public safety risk. For every life-sentence case, the Parole Board issues a written explanation and often sets strict conditions for release; those writeups become part of the public record. The Boston Herald reported the specific outcomes from this week’s hearing.
Why this is happening now
The surge in lifer hearings traces back to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s January 2024 ruling in Commonwealth v. Mattis. In that case, the court held that sentencing so-called emerging adults ages 18 to 20 to life without the possibility of parole violates the state constitution. The decision opened the door to resentencing and parole review for many inmates who had been serving life terms for crimes committed as young adults. Coverage of Mattis and its fallout has explained why the Parole Board is now revisiting cases like Nova’s. WBUR provides an in-depth look at the ruling and its statewide impact.
Victims' rights and next steps
Under Massachusetts law, victims and their families have the right to be notified about parole hearings, to provide victim-impact statements and to take part in certain stages of the process. The Parole Board’s Victim Services unit coordinates notifications and offers support so that families are not blindsided by hearings like the one involving St. Jean and Gallett.
Anyone interested in following life-sentence cases or reviewing board decisions can find public information online. The Mass. Parole Board Victim Services page and the life-sentence hearing calendar list upcoming hearings, resources for victims and contact information for the board.
