Com. v. Benney, R.
680 WDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 8, 2017Background
- In March 2008 appellant Robert Allen Benney and a younger accomplice, Kevin Partozoti, entered an elderly widow's home; Benney sexually assaulted, humiliated, and robbed the victim; charges included rape, IDSI, burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, unlawful restraint, theft, terroristic threats, and conspiracy.
- A jury convicted Benney in February 2009 on multiple counts; he received an aggregate sentence of 47 to 94 years. Direct appeal was affirmed and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal.
- Benney filed a pro se PCRA petition in March 2012; counsel (Emerick) filed a Turner/Finley no‑merit letter and sought to withdraw. The PCRA court issued a Rule 907 notice and ultimately dismissed Benney’s petitions without a hearing on June 6, 2014.
- Benney appealed pro se (prisoner mailbox rule applied to deem the appeal timely), raising ten issues principally alleging trial counsel ineffectiveness, layered ineffectiveness of PCRA counsel, evidentiary errors, sentencing errors, and denial of counsel.
- The PCRA court and Superior Court reviewed the record and denied relief, finding most claims either meritless, waived, or unsupported by prejudice, and concluding PCRA counsel did not render ineffective assistance in failing to pursue meritless claims.
Issues
| Issue | Benney's Argument | Commonwealth/PCRA Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Trial counsel ineffective for failing to object to Officer Rush’s testimony as bolstering/expert opinion | Rush’s testimony vouched for victim and amounted to expert opinion about sexual assault victims | Testimony described officer’s training, investigation, and observations; did not improperly vouch or give expert psychological opinion | Denied — counsel not ineffective; objection would be meritless |
| Trial counsel ineffective for failing to impeach witness Charles Earlywine with crimen falsi / conflict of interest (counsel formerly represented Earlywine) | Counsel failed to impeach a key witness and had conflict protecting Earlywine | No record citation showing prejudice or that impeachment would likely change outcome; jurors could infer witness’s criminal history | Denied — no prejudice shown; claim fails |
| Trial counsel ineffective for not objecting to Sergeant Luppino’s testimony that he had "absolutely no doubt" Benney was present | Such testimony invaded jury province and was impermissible opinion on guilt | Officer’s lay opinion was based on perceptions and investigation, admissible under Pa.R.E. 701 | Denied — testimony admissible as lay opinion; counsel not ineffective |
| Multiple trial counsel errors (voice ID suppression, jury instruction, sentencing errors, court considering silence, dangerous offender finding) and PCRA counsel ineffective for failing to raise them | Various procedural and constitutional errors at trial and sentencing; PCRA counsel failed to preserve/raise these | Many claims waived for failure to preserve in Rule 1925(b); underlying claims lacked arguable merit or were procedurally defaulted | Denied — claims waived or meritless; layered ineffectiveness fails because underlying claims lack arguable merit |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Reid, 99 A.3d 470 (Pa. 2014) (framework for layered ineffectiveness claims)
- Commonwealth v. McGill, 832 A.2d 1014 (Pa. 2003) (discussion of ineffectiveness prongs and appellate counsel duties)
- Commonwealth v. Treiber, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015) (impeachment with crimen falsi convictions ordinarily admissible)
- Commonwealth v. Collins, 957 A.2d 237 (Pa. 2008) (actual conflict of interest standard requiring demonstration of adverse effect)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance)
- Commonwealth v. Wah, 42 A.3d 335 (Pa. Super. 2012) (PCRA court may decline evidentiary hearing when claims are patently frivolous)
- Commonwealth v. Huggins, 68 A.3d 962 (Pa. Super. 2013) (law‑enforcement lay opinion admissible when based on observations and investigation)
- Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d 768 (Pa. Super. 2014) (counsel not ineffective for failing to pursue meritless claims)
- Commonwealth v. Kelley, 136 A.3d 1007 (Pa. Super. 2016) (failure to satisfy any prong of ineffectiveness test causes claim to fail)