Com. v. Easley, W.
1868 WDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 8, 2016Background
- July 10, 2014: While incarcerated, Easley assaulted a correctional officer (punched in the head) and spat on a nurse; two days later spat on another officer. He was confined in RHU status.
- Multiple transport orders were issued in 2015 to bring Easley from SCI Frackville to Erie for trial; jail staff repeatedly informed deputies that Easley refused transport and engaged in disruptive/self-harm conduct (e.g., cutting himself, throwing a blood-and-milk mixture at staff).
- Deputies determined transporting Easley posed significant security and safety risks (five-hour trip with stops); after consultation the deputies cancelled transport and the Commonwealth moved to try Easley in absentia.
- Judges Connelly and Garhart found Easley waived his right to be present by his conduct and granted the Commonwealth’s motion; Easley was tried by jury in absentia on July 22, 2015 and convicted of aggravated assault and two counts of aggravated harassment by a prisoner.
- Trial court sentenced Easley to an aggregate 18–36 months to run consecutively; post-sentence motion denied and Easley appealed, raising only that the trial court abused discretion in granting trial in absentia.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and petition to withdraw; the Superior Court independently reviewed the record, found no non-frivolous issues, affirmed the sentence, and granted counsel’s withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in trying Easley in absentia | Commonwealth: trial in absentia was appropriate given repeated refusals and safety risks; rescheduling would burden government and risk deputies | Easley: (argues) his absence was not voluntary and he had a right to be present at trial | Court: No abuse of discretion; Easley waived presence by conduct and safety/burden factors justified proceeding in absentia |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (Anders brief requirements)
- Commonwealth v. Millisock, 873 A.2d 748 (Pa. Super. 2005) (requirements for counsel seeking to withdraw on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Faulk, 928 A.2d 1061 (Pa. Super. 2007) (right to be present may be waived by conduct)
- Commonwealth v. Wilson, 712 A.2d 735 (Pa. 1998) (factors trial court should consider before proceeding in defendant’s absence)
- Commonwealth v. Flowers, 113 A.3d 1246 (Pa. Super. 2015) (appellate court must independently review record for overlooked non-frivolous issues)
- Commonwealth v. Daniels, 999 A.2d 590 (Pa. Super. 2010) (procedural step: review petition to withdraw before merits)
- Commonwealth v. Goodwin, 928 A.2d 287 (Pa. Super. 2007) (appellate duty to independently judge frivolousness)
- Commonwealth v. Orellana, 86 A.3d 877 (Pa. Super. 2014) (counsel must notify client of rights when filing Anders brief)