History
  • No items yet
midpage
Com. v. Edmunds, D.
2405 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Mar 14, 2018
Read the full case

Background

  • Derrick Edmunds and a co-defendant shot into a vehicle; Jason Bryan was killed and Kevin Robertson wounded. Edmunds gave an inculpatory statement.
  • Edmunds was tried jointly, convicted of first-degree murder and related charges, and sentenced to life without parole plus consecutive terms. This Court previously affirmed his conviction and the Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal.
  • Edmunds filed a PCRA petition alleging trial counsel was ineffective for not requesting a "no adverse inference" instruction and for failing to preserve a weight-of-the-evidence claim; the PCRA court initially granted relief on the no-adverse-inference claim.
  • This Court vacated the PCRA relief as to the no-adverse-inference instruction and remanded for disposition of the remaining weight/ineffectiveness claim. On remand, the PCRA court denied relief on the weight claim. Edmunds timely appealed.
  • The sole issue on appeal is whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to preserve/challenge the weight of the evidence; the PCRA court found Edmunds failed to show the underlying weight claim had arguable merit.

Issues

Issue Edmunds' Argument Commonwealth's Argument Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to preserve a challenge to the weight of the evidence Counsel failed to present a weight claim that had arguable merit (Edmunds contends lack of time for premeditation) The weight claim lacks arguable merit and was previously litigated; counsel is presumed effective Denied — Edmunds failed to prove the underlying weight claim had arguable merit, so ineffectiveness claim fails

Key Cases Cited

  • Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
  • Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121 (Pa. 2012) (counsel presumed effective; defendant must show both deficiency and prejudice)
  • Commonwealth v. Sneed, 45 A.3d 1096 (Pa. 2012) (sets three-prong test for PCRA ineffectiveness claims: arguable merit, no reasonable basis, prejudice)
  • Commonwealth v. Pierce, 786 A.2d 203 (Pa. 2001) (further discussion of standards for establishing counsel ineffectiveness in PCRA context)
  • Commonwealth v. Edmunds, 998 A.2d 1011 (Pa. Super. 2010) (prior appellate decision affirming Edmunds' convictions)
  • Commonwealth v. Perry, 128 A.3d 1285 (Pa. Super. 2015) (appellate review standards for PCRA orders)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Com. v. Edmunds, D.
Court Name: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Mar 14, 2018
Docket Number: 2405 EDA 2016
Court Abbreviation: Pa. Super. Ct.