Com. v. Davis, R.
2042 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 22, 2016Background
- On July 7, 2008, Freddie Mears was shot in the buttock in South Philadelphia; he later identified Ronald Davis as the shooter at trial and in a 2010 photo array, though he initially gave inconsistent statements to police and refused to ID at the preliminary hearing.
- Police, hospital records, and detectives corroborated the shooting, and a prison phone call showed the victim saying he would handle matters himself rather than press charges.
- Davis was tried and convicted (Feb. 27, 2012) of aggravated assault, violation of the Uniform Firearms Act (VUFA), and possession of an instrument of crime (PIC); he received an aggregate sentence of consecutive and concurrent terms totaling 10 to 20 years plus additional terms.
- Davis did not file post-sentence motions or a direct appeal; he later filed a timely pro se PCRA petition and obtained reinstatement of direct appeal rights nunc pro tunc.
- On appeal, Davis challenged sufficiency and weight of the evidence (focused on victim identification), admission of a stipulation regarding firearm license and medical records, and trial counsel’s ineffectiveness for failing to impeach the victim about alleged school attendance.
- The Superior Court affirmed: sufficiency upheld (jury could credit the victim’s in-court ID), weight claim waived (no post-sentence motion), stipulation admission unpreserved/harmless, and ineffective-assistance claim deferred to PCRA review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence (identification) | Commonwealth: victim’s in-court ID and photo-array ID suffice to prove Davis shot victim | Davis: victim’s inconsistent statements and prior convictions make ID insufficient | Affirmed — evidence sufficient; credibility for jury to decide |
| Weight of the evidence | Commonwealth: jury verdict reasonable based on witness testimony | Davis: verdict against weight because witness wavered and had crimen falsi convictions | Waived — no post-sentence motion; alternatively meritless (credibility matter for jury) |
| Admission of stipulation (firearm license, phone call, hospital records) | Commonwealth: properly read stipulation into record | Davis: counsel failed to acknowledge stipulation; admission prejudicial and violated confrontation | Not preserved — counsel did not object at trial; no relief granted |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to show Davis didn’t attend same high school) | Davis: counsel should have presented evidence that he didn’t attend same high school to impeach victim’s familiarity | Commonwealth: claim is for PCRA review and not appropriate on direct appeal | Deferred/denied on direct appeal — court declines to address merits and directs PCRA process (no exception met) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Mauz, 122 A.3d 1039 (Pa. Super. 2015) (standard for sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Rahman, 75 A.3d 497 (Pa. Super. 2013) (sufficiency and reasonable-inferences standard)
- Commonwealth v. Palo, 24 A.3d 1050 (Pa. Super. 2011) (distinguishing weight from sufficiency challenges)
- Commonwealth v. Liston, 977 A.2d 1089 (Pa. 2009) (reinstatement of appeal rights nunc pro tunc does not automatically restore post-sentence motion rights)
- Commonwealth v. Lofton, 57 A.3d 1270 (Pa. Super. 2012) (weight claims must be preserved via post-sentence motion)
- Commonwealth v. May, 887 A.2d 750 (Pa. 2005) (evidentiary rulings and confrontation objections must be raised at trial)
- Commonwealth v. Holmes, 79 A.3d 562 (Pa. 2013) (ineffective-assistance claims generally reserved for PCRA; limited exceptions)