Com. v. Blake, J.
Com. v. Blake, J. No. 1429 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Apr 20, 2017Background
- Appellant Jaquill James Blake was convicted of shooting and killing Alexis Rosario after an argument at the Glenside Housing Projects in Reading, PA.
- Eyewitness Dean Schappell drove Blake to and from the scene, stayed in the vehicle while Blake exited, heard gunshots, and then saw Blake shoot Rosario; Blake returned, directed Schappell to drive away, and later sold Schappell drugs at a nearby hotel.
- At trial, testimony revealed Schappell had been in the city to purchase illegal drugs from Blake; Blake later challenged counsel’s failure to object to this evidence as ineffective assistance.
- The Majority held the drug-related testimony admissible under the res gestae (history-of-the-case) exception as forming part of the natural development of facts; Judge Strassburger concurred in the result but disagreed with that application.
- Strassburger concluded the drug-deal evidence was not so intertwined with the homicide that it was inseparable from the narrative and therefore arguable merit existed to object, but Blake failed to show prejudice given overwhelming eyewitness evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to testimony that Blake sold drugs to Schappell | Blake: references to drug dealing were unrelated bad-acts evidence that counsel should have excluded | Commonwealth: evidence was part of the res gestae/history of the case and thus admissible; no prejudice from omission | Court: Majority upheld admission under res gestae and denied ineffective-assistance claim for lack of prejudice; Strassburger concurred on outcome but disagreed that res gestae applied |
| Whether the res gestae exception justified admission of the drug-dealing testimony | Blake: drug deal was collateral and not part of same transaction as the killing | Commonwealth: drug-related facts formed the natural development of events and were properly admitted | Court: Majority found res gestae applicable; concurrence found it inapplicable but ruled no prejudice shown so denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 52 A.3d 320 (Pa. Super. 2012) (survey of res gestae exception and its limits)
- Swan v. Commonwealth, 104 Pa. 218 (1883) (extraneous offense must form a link in chain of proof)
- Commonwealth v. Coles, 108 A. 826 (Pa. 1919) (bad-acts admissible when inextricably mixed with history of charged act)
- Commonwealth v. Lark, 543 A.2d 491 (Pa. 1988) (multiple crimes held interwoven and part of one narrative)
- Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 25 A.3d 277 (Pa. 2011) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance requires reasonable probability of different outcome)