Com. v. Davis, J., Com. v. Davis, J. No. 985 WDA 2016

Background

Appellant Jason John Davis was convicted after a 2009 bench trial of multiple counts including burglary, theft, conspiracy, receiving stolen property, and criminal mischief; aggregate sentence 27–54 years plus 27 years probation.
Direct appeal affirmed by this Court in 2011. Appellant filed a timely pro se PCRA petition in 2012; counsel filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter and sought to withdraw.
PCRA court notified Appellant of intent to dismiss under Pa.R.Crim.P. 907, then dismissed the petition in June 2014; Appellant later obtained reinstatement of appellate rights nunc pro tunc and appealed the denial.
Appellant raised multiple claims on PCRA appeal: ineffective assistance for failure to suppress an alleged illegal stop and related statements, failure to interview/subpoena witnesses, insufficient evidence for burglary, failure to object to hearsay, PCRA court’s alleged failure to independently review counsel’s Finley letter, and claims tied to alleged criminal conduct by the trial judge.
The PCRA court and this Court found most claims waived, previously litigated, or without merit; PCRA dismissal was affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Appellant's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
1. Were trial & appellate counsel ineffective for not challenging the vehicle stop and related statements?	Counsel failed to challenge an unlawful investigative stop and the admission of passenger Jesika Gray’s statements as fruit of the poisonous tree.	No property or statements of Appellant were seized; Appellant lacked standing to challenge detention of another passenger.	Denied — underlying suppression claim lacked merit; no ineffective assistance.
2. Was trial counsel ineffective for failing to interview/subpoena witnesses?	Trial counsel ignored Appellant’s request to interview/subpoena defense witnesses.	Issue was not preserved in Appellant’s concise statement and is waived.	Waived — not considered on appeal.
3. Is the evidence insufficient for burglary?	Evidence did not support burglary convictions.	Sufficiency claims are not cognizable on PCRA and issue was already litigated on direct appeal.	Denied — previously litigated and not cognizable on PCRA.
4. Was counsel ineffective for not objecting to hearsay (Trooper Vanderaar)?	Counsel should have objected to hearsay testimony admitted to prove the truth of the matter asserted.	This claim was previously rejected on direct appeal (waiver or harmless error).	Denied — claim previously litigated and counsel not ineffective.
5. Did the PCRA court fail to independently review counsel’s Finley letter before permitting withdrawal?	PCRA court relied on a flawed Finley letter and did not conduct independent review.	Record shows the PCRA court reviewed transcripts, filings, and authored an opinion before dismissal.	Denied — court conducted independent review.
6. Was jury-trial waiver involuntary because the trial judge was allegedly criminally active/using narcotics while presiding?	Appellant could not knowingly waive jury trial because he did not know the judge was committing crimes/using narcotics.	Allegations about the judge surfaced years later; no nexus between judge’s misconduct and Appellant’s case.	Denied — no nexus shown; claim fails.

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009) (standard for showing ineffective assistance of counsel)
Commonwealth v. Ragan, 923 A.2d 1169 (Pa. 2007) (standard of review for PCRA denial)
Commonwealth v. Millner, 888 A.2d 680 (Pa. 2005) (defendant lacks standing to suppress evidence absent personal privacy interest)
Commonwealth v. Carelli, 546 A.2d 1185 (Pa. Super. 1988) (merit of underlying suppression claim required to support ineffective-assistance claim for failing to file suppression motion)
Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973 (Pa. 1987) (counsel not ineffective for failing to pursue meritless claims)
Commonwealth v. Price, 876 A.2d 988 (Pa. Super. 2005) (sufficiency claims not cognizable on PCRA)
Turner v. Commonwealth, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (procedural context for Finley/Turner withdrawal practice)
Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (procedural guidance on counsel withdrawal under Turner)