Com. v. Akhmedov, K.
216 A.3d 307
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2019Background
- On July 16, 2013, Khusen Akhmedov was driving a silver Audi on Roosevelt Boulevard at very high speed while allegedly drag-racing a white Honda; he struck and killed a mother (Samara Banks) and three of her children who were crossing the street.
- Witnesses described weaving through traffic, speeds estimated 70–100 mph, and near-collisions; Appellant remained at the scene and was arrested.
- Appellant was charged with multiple counts including four counts of third-degree murder (malice without intent), involuntary manslaughter, homicide by vehicle, and recklessly endangering another person.
- The Commonwealth introduced prior-bad-acts evidence: (1) Appellant’s driving record showing numerous traffic violations and prior reckless-driving convictions, (2) testimony about a reckless-driving incident 8 days earlier (Melissa Stothoff/Officer Miles), and (3) a Facebook video/post of prior drag racing.
- After a bench trial Appellant was convicted on all counts and sentenced to consecutive terms totaling 17–34 years. Appellant appealed, raising evidentiary, sufficiency, weight, and sentencing claims. The Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Commonwealth's/Trial Court's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior-bad-acts evidence (driving record, prior reckless-driving incident, Facebook drag-race video) | Evidence was impermissible propensity proof and unduly prejudicial; not probative of malice on the night of the crash | Evidence showed knowledge, intent to drag-race, and a pattern of sustained recklessness relevant to malice; probative value outweighed prejudice (except driving record) | Court affirmed admission of Stothoff incident and Facebook video; driving-record admission was erroneous but harmless given overwhelming other evidence |
| Request for special jury instruction on malice in vehicle-fatality context | Wanted an instruction requiring that conduct "almost assured" death/injury (stronger language) | Standard third-degree murder instruction accurately states law; no requirement to use appellant’s preferred phrasing | Court properly applied standard P.S.S.C.J.I. instruction; no relief |
| Sufficiency of evidence for third-degree murder (malice) | Driving was at most negligent/speeding; did not demonstrate the heightened malice (conscious disregard) needed for third-degree murder | Evidence established sustained, deliberate drag-racing at extreme speeds, prior warning, weaving, near collisions—supporting conscious disregard of high risk | Evidence sufficient; convictions for third-degree murder affirmed |
| Weight of the evidence (new trial request) | Trial court mischaracterized roadway as residential, overstated speed/reconstruction, ignored Appellant's attempts to avoid collision and to render aid | Court considered whole record, residence/business mix on boulevard, eyewitnesses, reconstruction, and prior reckless conduct | No abuse of discretion; verdict did not shock the conscience; denial of new trial affirmed |
| Discretionary aspects of sentencing (excessive sentence / failure to consider mitigation) | Sentence excessive; court failed to account for accidental nature and mitigating factors | Court relied on PSI/mental-health report, considered loss to family, malice, public protection and rehabilitation; imposed below-guidelines terms for murder counts but consecutive terms overall | No abuse of discretion; sentencing explained on record and affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Ballard, 80 A.3d 380 (Pa. 2013) (standard for appellate review of evidentiary rulings)
- Commonwealth v. Sherwood, 982 A.2d 483 (Pa. 2009) (Rule 404(b) balancing; relevance and probative use of prior bad acts)
- Commonwealth v. Packer, 168 A.3d 161 (Pa. 2017) (malice may be found where actor consciously disregards an unjustified, extremely high risk)
- Commonwealth v. Riggs, 63 A.3d 780 (Pa. Super. 2012) (prior reckless-driving incidents admissible to show awareness of risk and sustained recklessness)
- Commonwealth v. Kling, 731 A.2d 145 (Pa. Super. 1999) (upholding third-degree murder in fatal racing incident where sustained recklessness shown)
- Commonwealth v. Comer, 716 A.2d 593 (Pa. 1998) (reversing aggravated-assault conviction where evidence failed to show awareness and conscious disregard of risk)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 185 A.3d 316 (Pa. 2018) (harmless-error standard where improperly admitted evidence did not contribute to verdict)
- Commonwealth v. Carson, 913 A.2d 220 (Pa. 2006) (trial courts need not use specific language so long as instruction accurately states law)
- Commonwealth v. Ventura, 975 A.2d 1128 (Pa. Super. 2009) (sentencing court’s obligations and presumption of consideration of PSI)