Com. v. Balliet, C., 2163 MDA 2015

Christine Balliet was charged in 2007 with multiple violent offenses including attempted murder and solicitation to murder her husband; cases were consolidated and she eventually entered nolo contendere pleas in September 2008.
Plea factual basis included testimony that Balliet stabbed her husband, attempted to run him over, and later sought to hire a hitman while incarcerated (an undercover trooper recorded the solicitation).
Balliet was sentenced in October 2008 to an aggregate term of 11.5 to 23 years; she filed pro se motions to withdraw her pleas which the trial court did not consider because she was represented by counsel, a ruling later upheld on direct appeal.
Balliet filed a timely PCRA petition alleging trial counsel was ineffective for (a) failing to review discovery that impeached inmate-witness Donna Baker, (b) failing to interview corrections officer Crisanne Kelley, (c) failing to move to withdraw the plea, and (d) allowing a plea induced by false sentencing promises.
At the PCRA hearing plea counsel (Kroboth) testified he discussed strategy and discovery with Balliet, concluded an entrapment defense would be weak/meritless given the undercover trooper tape, and denied making sentencing promises; the PCRA court credited counsel and denied relief.
The Superior Court affirmed, holding Balliet failed to satisfy the ineffectiveness test because the underlying claims lacked arguable merit and she did not prove prejudice.

Issue	Balliet's Argument	Opposing Argument	Held
Counsel failed to share discovery impeaching Donna Baker	Discovery showed Baker lied/forged letters and would have undermined Commonwealth witness credibility, so Balliet would not have pled	Counsel had no discovery showing Baker worked with police; impeachment would not undercut taped solicitation; defense strategy reasonable	Denied — no arguable merit; counsel not ineffective
Counsel failed to interview Corrections Officer Crisanne Kelley to develop entrapment defense	Kelley would have confirmed Baker set up the hitman contact, supporting entrapment	Kelley’s testimony showed Baker acted alone; entrapment requires police inducement, not opportunity; taped dealings with undercover trooper fatal to entrapment	Denied — entrapment meritless; counsel reasonably declined it
Counsel failed to file motion to withdraw nolo contendere plea	Pro se withdrawal motion should have alerted counsel to problems with discovery and prompted action	Pro se motion was a nullity while counsel represented Balliet; Superior Court already held no right to file pro se motion	Denied — no legal effect to pro se motion; claim waived and meritless
Plea was involuntary due to alleged sentencing promises by counsel	Counsel promised favorable sentencing, inducing plea	Counsel denied making promises; court found counsel credible that no promise was made and that plea was strategic to avoid trial	Denied — plea knowingly, voluntarily, intelligently entered

Commonwealth v. Stewart, 84 A.3d 701 (Pa. Super. 2013) (ineffective assistance elements)
Commonwealth v. Loner, 836 A.2d 125 (Pa. Super. 2003) (counsel not ineffective for failing to pursue meritless claim)
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 139 A.3d 1257 (Pa. 2016) (PCRA prong analysis guidance)
Commonwealth v. Nischan, 928 A.2d 349 (Pa. Super. 2007) (pro se filings null while represented by counsel)
Commonwealth v. Weiss, 81 A.3d 767 (Pa. 2013) (no ineffectiveness where impeachment evidence would not help defense)
Commonwealth v. Black, 125 A.3d 493 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) (entrapment requires outrageous police conduct)
Commonwealth v. Zingarelli, 839 A.2d 1064 (Pa. Super. 2003) (police conduct must be egregious for entrapment)
Commonwealth v. Montalvo, 114 A.3d 401 (Pa. 2015) (presumption of effective assistance of counsel)