A Superior Court judge in July set aside Tempest's conviction, finding that that police and prosecutors had violated Tempest's right to a fair trial by unduly suggestive questioning of witnesses, failing to disclose evidence and suppressing key details about a witness' changing statements.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — Twenty-one years ago the state Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Raymond D. "Beaver" Tempest Jr. for the 1982 bludgeoning death of a former homecoming queen in Woonsocket. And on Thursday, that same court -- albeit with different justices -- once again considered whether that conviction should stand.

The high court heard arguments Thursday on whether to overturn or uphold Superior Court Judge Daniel A. Procaccini in vacating Tempest’s second-degree murder conviction for the beating death of Doreen C. Picard. Wearing a navy suit, Tempest observed the hour or so of argument surrounded by supporters. Picard's parents, Ron and Simone Picard, sat in the front row next to Attorney General Peter F. Kilmartin.

Assistant Attorney General Aaron Weisman urged the court to let the 1992 conviction stand, that to do otherwise would unfairly prejudicial the state as many witnesses have died. In addition, he argued Tempest's lawyer at his 1992 trial was well aware of evidence Procaccini wrongly concluded had been withheld by police.

"The whole issue of the maroon car is plainly not material," Weisman said, referring to information that Woonsocket police did not disclose that the owner of a maroon car a witness identified near the murder scene told police he never lent or sold the car to Tempest’s alleged accomplice.

Michael Kendall, a Boston lawyer representing Tempest, countered that evidence of the maroon car "tied the state's case together."

Kendall, too, argued that Tempest's efforts seeking relief are not time-barred because they involved Brady disclosures, exculpatory evidence or evidence that could be used to impeach a witness that was not known at the time of trial.

Justice William P. Robinson asked if the window in which defendants can seek relief is "infinite? Does it never end?" Kendall responded that a case-specific analysis is needed. "A delay for which a defendant is not responsible for cannot count against him," Kendall said.

Prosecutors accused Tempest of strangling Picard, 22, and then hitting her with a lead pipe after she found him beating her landlord, Susan M. Laferte, in the basement of Laferte’s house. They said he had boasted to friends that he would “slide” because his father was Providence County high sheriff and his brother a Woonsocket detective. He was convicted in 1992 and sentenced to serve 85 years in prison.

Procaccini in July set aside Tempest's conviction, finding that that police and prosecutors had violated Tempest’s right to a fair trial by unduly suggestive questioning of witnesses, failing to disclose evidence and suppressing key details about a witness’ changing statements. He did not declare Tempest innocent, but said that he now maintains the presumption of innocence. He released him on home-confinement.



A good deal of questioning Thursday centered on Procaccini's criticism of then-prosecutor James W. Ryan for directing a witness not to include details of her account that didn’t correspond with earlier versions. Ryan wrote in his notes “too late, don’t volunteer new info, will cause big problems.”

Justice Maureen McKenna Goldberg faulted Procaccini for disregarding Ryan's testimony that he believed that evidence to be inculpatory and that the "big problem" was that it came 17 days before trial and might cause delay.

Justice Gilbert V. Indeglia questioned "didn't he have an obligation to give it to defense? ... It might have shown [the witness] is an out and out liar."

Weisman said Tempest's trial lawyer, the late William A. Dimitri Jr., repeatedly tore at that witness' testimony regardless, questioning her account for its "journalistic attention to detail." The high court is expected to rule in the coming months.