The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Monday wiped out the conviction of Renardo Williams and ordered a new trial in the 2018 Brockton shooting that left one man dead. The justices found that the trial judge’s handling of crucial evidence may have undercut Williams’ claim of self-defense, sending the case back to Superior Court for a do-over.
In a written opinion, the SJC concluded that the judge was wrong to initially keep out statements from Mayklens Francois, the surviving victim, that he had a gun and later tossed it, then allow those statements only after Williams took the stand. That late switch, the court wrote, "had a reasonable possibility to affect" Williams’ trial strategy, according to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Case background
The shooting unfolded on May 12, 2018, after what investigators described as an attempted marijuana deal in a convenience-store parking lot on Pleasant Street. As detailed by the Plymouth County District Attorney's Office, officers found two men shot inside an SUV near 139 Pleasant Street, and 26-year-old Bethgy Cator was later pronounced dead.
Investigators said surveillance video captured flashes from the driver’s side of the SUV, and they recovered 11 spent .40-caliber shell casings at the scene. Prosecutors also presented fingerprint evidence tying Williams to the vehicle, with contemporaneous coverage by CBS Boston noting the arrests that followed.
Why the court stepped in
Williams was convicted by a jury in 2021 and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. The SJC, however, ruled that the trial judge’s approach to Francois’ statements blocked Williams from fully pressing his self-defense theory.
As summarized by WCVB, the justices found that letting in the surviving victim’s statements only after the defendant testified "had a reasonable possibility to affect" how jurors viewed the case.
What's next
The SJC has remanded the case to Superior Court for a new trial, leaving it to the trial judge to handle scheduling and any pretrial rulings, according to the court documents. A date for the retrial has not yet been set. Both sides are expected to revisit what testimony and out-of-court statements can come in, an evidentiary fight that sat at the heart of the SJC’s order, as outlined by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.
Why it matters
Beyond Williams’ case, the ruling highlights how much the timing and context of out-of-court statements can matter in trials where self-defense is the central story. Lawyers on both sides of violent-crime cases will be watching to see whether trial judges shift how, and when, they admit interviews and other hearsay evidence, since the SJC tagged the sequencing of that evidence as a key part of whether Williams’ first trial was fair.
