Com. v. Bates, M.
Com. v. Bates, M. No. 291 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 13, 2017Background
- Appellant Marc S. Bates was convicted in Lebanon County for a drug sale; key identification evidence came from Sergeant Hopkins and a Confidential Informant (CI).
- Trial court refused to compel disclosure of the CI and excluded testimony from Appellant’s girlfriend, Ali Marinkov, as an alibi witness for lack of Rule 567 notice.
- The Superior Court majority remanded for further inquiry into CI safety and questioned the trial court’s exclusion of Marinkov’s testimony.
- Justice Olson (Pa. Super.) issued a concurring and dissenting memorandum: she agreed that weight/sufficiency challenges and the exclusion of a photograph were properly decided against Bates.
- Olson disagreed with the majority on two points: she would not remand for CI disclosure (concluding Hopkins was not the only non‑CI eyewitness) and would affirm exclusion of Marinkov’s testimony as an alibi witness for inadequate notice.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Bates' Argument | Held (Olson, J.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred in refusing to disclose CI identity | CI privilege applies; disclosure unnecessary if other eyewitnesses or safety concerns justify nondisclosure | CI identity is material and reasonable to seek under Payne factors; disclosure required | No remand; disclosure not required because Marinkov’s presence means Hopkins was not the sole non‑CI eyewitness and Payne does not mandate disclosure |
| Whether Marinkov’s testimony was admissible as an alibi without prior Rule 567 notice | Exclusion proper where defendant failed to provide required alibi notice and specifics | Marinkov would show Bates was not the seller and support mistaken identity/alibi defenses; testimony should be admitted | Exclusion proper; Marinkov qualified as an alibi witness and notice was required; trial court did not err |
| Sufficiency/weight of evidence | Commonwealth contends evidence (vehicle, Hopkins’ ID) supports conviction | Bates argues misidentification; insufficient evidence and weight against conviction | Agrees with majority: weight and sufficiency challenges fail; conviction stands |
| Exclusion of photograph of Bates and his brother | Photo inadmissible under trial court’s evidentiary rulings | Bates sought admission; argued relevance to identity/mistake | Agrees with majority: trial court did not err in refusing to admit the photograph |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Watson, 69 A.3d 605 (Pa. Super. 2013) (discusses qualified privilege for informer identities and standards to overcome it)
- Commonwealth v. Payne, 656 A.2d 77 (Pa. 1994) (disclosure required when informer is the only material witness besides a single police officer)
- Commonwealth v. Marsh, 997 A.2d 318 (Pa. 2010) (permitting nondisclosure where CI safety would be compromised)
- Commonwealth v. Roxbury, 602 A.2d 826 (Pa. 1992) (definition of alibi: places defendant elsewhere at relevant time so it is impossible to have committed the crime)