Com. v. Bennett, S., 225 EDA 2016

Background

In 2005 a homicide occurred; Sabrina Clyburn observed three men (Bennett, Shields, Lewis) near the victim's house, saw one enter, heard gunshots, and later identified Bennett as involved.
Bennett, Shields, and Lewis were tried jointly; all exercised their right not to testify. Clyburn’s preliminary-hearing testimony was read to the jury at trial after she became unavailable.
A jury convicted Bennett of second-degree murder and related offenses; he received an aggregate life sentence. Direct appeal and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court were denied.
Bennett filed a timely PCRA petition; counsel filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter and sought to withdraw. The PCRA court dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing; Bennett appealed pro se.
Bennett’s PCRA claims chiefly alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel (failure to object to use of Clyburn’s preliminary hearing testimony, failure to investigate impeachment and mental-health evidence) and ineffective assistance of PCRA counsel for not raising those claims.
The PCRA court and Superior Court reviewed whether defense had a full and fair opportunity to cross-examine Clyburn at the preliminary hearing and whether any nondisclosure or false testimony undermined admissibility or required relief.

Issues

Issue	Bennett's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Admissibility of Clyburn’s preliminary-hearing testimony / trial counsel ineffective for not objecting	Clyburn’s pre-hearing contact with police reports (Officers Sprague & Pollack) were not disclosed before the preliminary hearing; counsel lacked full and fair opportunity to cross-examine—Bazemore violation	Officers’ written reports were consistent with Clyburn’s testimony, were provided before trial, and did not contain substantial impeachment material that would render prior cross-examination inadequate	No Bazemore violation; trial counsel not ineffective
Prosecutorial misconduct / allowing false testimony	Prosecutor knowingly allowed materially false testimony when Clyburn said she had no contact with police before June 11	Commonwealth produced investigative records and detective testimony correcting/clarifying Clyburn’s contacts; no evidence of deceptive tactics or nondisclosure	No prosecutorial misconduct; no arguable merit to ineffective-assistance claim
Failure to investigate or use Clyburn’s mental-health history for impeachment	Counsel should have investigated Clyburn’s depression/medication to impeach credibility and ability to perceive/recall	Record showed only diagnosis and medication mention; no evidence the depression impaired observation/recall; issue speculative	No arguable merit; counsel not ineffective
Ineffectiveness of PCRA counsel for not raising the above claims	PCRA counsel failed to assert trial counsel’s ineffectiveness on these grounds	Turner/Finley letter did raise the matters or counsel reasonably disposed of them; and underlying trial-ineffectiveness claims lack merit	PCRA counsel not ineffective; PCRA court did not err denying relief without evidentiary hearing

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Bazemore, 531 Pa. 582, 614 A.2d 684 (Pa. 1992) (prior testimony inadmissible if defendant lacked full and fair opportunity to cross-examine because of withheld impeachment evidence)
Commonwealth v. Carpenter, 472 Pa. 510, 372 A.2d 806 (Pa. 1977) (prosecutor must correct known false testimony; conviction invalid if obtained through knowing use of materially false testimony)
Commonwealth v. Ali, 608 Pa. 71, 10 A.3d 282 (Pa. 2010) (purposeful prosecutorial misrepresentation requires record evidence of deceptive tactics)
Commonwealth v. Davido, 630 Pa. 217, 106 A.3d 611 (Pa. 2014) (jury must be informed when a witness’s mental disability impairs ability to observe/recall/report)
Commonwealth v. Luster, 71 A.3d 1029 (Pa. Super. 2013) (prior statements used for impeachment must be adopted by witness; immaterial dissimilarities do not constitute substantial impeachment)
Commonwealth v. Ligons, 601 Pa. 103, 971 A.2d 1125 (Pa. 2009) (three-prong test for counsel ineffectiveness: arguable merit, no reasonable basis, prejudice)
Commonwealth v. Spotz, 610 Pa. 17, 18 A.3d 244 (Pa. 2011) (presumption of counsel effectiveness and burden on petitioner)
Commonwealth v. Ousley, 21 A.3d 1238 (Pa. Super. 2011) (standard of review for denial of post-conviction relief)
Commonwealth v. Cruz-Centeno, 668 A.2d 536 (Pa. Super. 1995) (nondisclosure of prior inconsistent statements at preliminary hearing can deny full and fair opportunity to cross-examine)
Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (standards for counsel withdrawal/Turner procedure)
Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (en banc) (procedures for counsel seeking to withdraw on no-merit PCRA appeals)