Com. v. Alston, K.
Com. v. Alston, K. No. 645 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Mar 28, 2017Background
- In 2007 a jury convicted Khaliaf D. Alston of attempted murder, robbery, conspiracy, aggravated assault, and PIC; he was sentenced to 40–80 years. The victim (Pinkney) was shot in the right eye during a robbery, lost most vision, and later identified Alston from a photo array.
- A letter found at Alston’s home, attributed to him by handwriting analysis, bragged about shooting someone in the eye and prompted detectives to reinvestigate, leading to Alston’s identification and arrest.
- Alston filed a first PCRA petition raising ineffective-assistance and after-discovered-evidence claims; the PCRA court dismissed some claims without a hearing and held an evidentiary hearing on counsel’s failure to call two alibi witnesses.
- The PCRA court denied relief after finding: (1) references at trial to a “homicide task force” were not prejudicial and were cured by a jury instruction; (2) alleged after-discovered evidence about Detective Dove consisted only of charges (not convictions) and would be impeachment-only and immaterial given overwhelming evidence; and (3) trial counsel had a reasonable basis for not calling the two proposed alibi witnesses and Alston suffered no prejudice.
- Alston appealed; the Superior Court affirmed the PCRA court’s dismissal and denial of relief.
Issues
| Issue | Alston's Argument | Commonwealth/PCRA Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsel ineffective for not moving for mistrial / not objecting to curative instruction after detective referenced a "homicide task force" | References to a homicide task force prejudiced the jury and counsel should have sought a mistrial or objected to the instruction | References explained how defendant was identified; instruction cured any prejudice; motion for mistrial would be meritless | Denied — no arguable merit to IAC; summary dismissal without hearing proper |
| After-discovered evidence: Detective Dove later charged with serious crimes | Charges against Dove show he was compromised; would have undermined his credibility and changed the outcome | Charges are indictments only (not evidence), would be used solely to impeach, and would not overcome victim ID and the incriminating letter | Denied — no hearing; evidence inadmissible/ impeachment-only and not likely to change result |
| Counsel ineffective for not calling alibi witnesses (Phillippe Bibbs, Dominique Everett) | Both witnesses would have provided an alibi placing Alston at home the night of the shooting | Counsel reasonably declined: Everett was previously an ineffective witness and Alston told counsel not to call her; Bibbs appeared fabricated and was learned of late; calling them could harm misidentification defense | Denied — after an evidentiary hearing court credited trial counsel; failure to call witnesses had reasonable basis and caused no prejudice |
| Whether PCRA court erred by not holding evidentiary hearings on some claims | Alston argued hearings were needed to develop credibility and show prejudice | For claims lacking arguable merit (meritless motion or inadmissible evidence), hearings would serve no purpose | Denied — summary dismissal appropriate where claims lack arguable merit or are conclusively meritless |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Baumhammers, 92 A.3d 708 (Pa. 2014) (PCRA summary-dismissal and IAC standards)
- Commonwealth v. Ligons, 971 A.2d 1125 (Pa. 2009) (presumption of counsel effectiveness)
- Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973 (Pa. 1987) (three-part test for IAC)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (constitutional standard for counsel ineffectiveness)
- Commonwealth v. Chmiel, 889 A.2d 501 (Pa. 2005) (requirements for proving failure-to-call-witnesses IAC)
- Commonwealth v. Pagan, 950 A.2d 270 (Pa. 2008) (elements of after-discovered evidence claim)
- Commonwealth v. Griffin, 137 A.3d 605 (Pa. Super. 2016) (indictments are not admissible evidence for after-discovered-evidence claims)