Com. v. Cottle, T.
Com. v. Cottle, T. No. 3033 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Mar 15, 2017Background
- Timothy L. Cottle was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault and simple assault for a June 2009 attack on his cousin; he was sentenced to 10–20 years’ imprisonment.
- This Court affirmed the conviction and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal.
- Cottle filed a timely pro se PCRA petition (March 29, 2013); counsel filed an amended PCRA petition (Feb. 8, 2015).
- At trial the victim testified that certain diary entries about Cottle had been altered; Cottle claims the testimony implied he wrote/altered entries.
- Cottle alleged trial counsel was ineffective for (1) failing to hire a handwriting expert to challenge diary-related implications, and (2) failing to seek a continuance when the Commonwealth added witness Kenneth Brown the morning of trial.
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing; Cottle appealed and the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counsel ineffective for not hiring handwriting expert | Cottle: a handwriting expert would rebut implication he wrote/altered diary entries | Commonwealth/PCRA court: no expert identified as available or willing; victim’s detailed assault testimony made expert unlikely to change outcome | Rejected — Cottle failed to identify an available expert or show a reasonable probability of a different outcome |
| Counsel ineffective for not requesting continuance for new witness (Kenneth Brown) | Cottle: counsel lacked time to prepare for Brown’s testimony; continuance was necessary | Commonwealth/PCRA court: counsel had spoken to Brown pretrial, received Commonwealth notes morning of trial, challenged testimony and cross‑examined effectively; court denied continuance | Rejected — counsel cross‑examined Brown and no prejudice shown |
| PCRA court erred by denying petition without evidentiary hearing | Cottle: factual disputes about counsel’s performance required a hearing | Commonwealth/PCRA court: record presented no genuine disputed material facts that would entitle relief | Rejected — no genuine issues of material fact; denial without hearing proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 139 A.3d 1257 (Pa. 2016) (standard for reviewing PCRA denials and ineffective assistance framework)
- Commonwealth v. Benner, 147 A.3d 915 (Pa. Super. 2016) (ineffective assistance elements and burden on petitioner)
- Commonwealth v. Treiber, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015) (requirements for proving counsel ineffective for failing to call expert witnesses)
- Commonwealth v. Wah, 42 A.3d 335 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standards for when a PCRA court may dismiss without an evidentiary hearing)