Com. v. Arroyo-O'Neill, J.
Com. v. Arroyo-O'Neill, J. No. 1090 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 10, 2017Background
- In June 2014 police observed Jorge Luis Arroyo-O’Neill driving erratically, pursued him, performed a PIT maneuver, and after a foot/chase and use of Taser/pepper spray arrested him. Video and trooper testimony corroborated the pursuit.
- Officers found large quantities of drugs on Arroyo-O’Neill (bags later tested as heroin, cocaine, marijuana), two cell phones, and over $3,600 in cash.
- A jury convicted him of PWID, possession, possession of paraphernalia, fleeing/eluding (high-speed chase), and DUI; sentencing produced an aggregate 8.5–20 year term.
- Trial court admitted hospital records (certified) and trooper testimony about positive alcohol/marijuana results over Confrontation/hearsay objections.
- Defendant and Commonwealth both appealed (cross-appeals). The Superior Court affirmed the sentence but vacated the RRRI minimum-sentence calculation, holding fleeing/eluding (high-speed chase) is "violent behavior" under the RRRI statute.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth / Prosecution Argument | Arroyo-O’Neill / Defense Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for PWID and DUI | Evidence (large quantities, packaging, cash, expert testimony) supports intent to deliver and DUI impairment | Evidence was weak/inconsistent (amounts could be personal, no field sobriety tests, effects from taser/pepper spray) | Convictions for PWID and DUI were supported by sufficient evidence and affirmed |
| Weight of the evidence (PWID & DUI) | Jury verdicts reasonable given expert and trooper testimony, video, lab results | Verdicts shocked conscience because of alleged inconsistencies and provocation of symptoms by police tactics | Trial court did not abuse discretion; verdicts not against the weight of the evidence |
| Motion to suppress (traffic stop) | Trooper had probable cause based on observing vehicle driving in officer’s lane and other traffic violations | Video did not show wrong‑lane driving; stop lacked reasonable suspicion | Suppression denial affirmed — trooper testimony credible and supported probable cause |
| Admission of hospital records; Confrontation Clause | Records are business records; Commonwealth provided certification; records admissible and cumulative | Late certification; hearsay and testimonial lab/medical results violated Sixth Amendment right to confront testers | Admission via certification upheld as business records; but trooper testimony about test results violated Confrontation Clause. Error deemed harmless given overwhelming independent DUI evidence |
| RRRI eligibility (whether fleeing/eluding high‑speed chase constitutes "violent behavior") | Fleeing/eluding (high‑speed chase) endangers officers/public and, when graded a 3rd‑degree felony by statute, constitutes violent behavior disqualifying RRRI | Trial court: statute not historically a violent crime; risk does not equal "violent behavior" under RRRI | Superior Court: felony fleeing/eluding with "endangering by high‑speed chase" is "violent behavior" under 61 Pa.C.S. §4503(1); RRRI minimum vacated (but overall sentence affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hansley, 24 A.3d 410 (Pa. Super. 2011) (standard for sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745 (Pa. 2000) (weight‑of‑the‑evidence standard and trial court deference)
- Commonwealth v. Yohe, 79 A.3d 520 (Pa. 2013) (Confrontation Clause and primary‑purpose test for testimonial reports)
- Commonwealth v. Chester, 101 A.3d 56 (Pa. 2014) (RRRI §4503(1): first‑degree burglary as violent behavior; interpretive framework)
- Commonwealth v. Cullen‑Doyle, 133 A.3d 14 (Pa. Super. 2016) (single violent conviction can establish a present history for RRRI disqualification)
- Commonwealth v. Finnecy, 135 A.3d 1028 (Pa. Super. 2016) (resisting arrest can constitute "violent behavior" for RRRI in light of substantial risk of injury)
- Commonwealth v. Bowen, 55 A.3d 1254 (Pa. Super. 2012) (legislative intent and grading of fleeing/eluding where high‑speed chase endangers public)