Com. v. Fisher, K.
258 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 28, 2017Background
- On August 26, 2015, Kelly Fisher went to her ex‑boyfriend’s mother’s house to pick up their teenage son; an on‑site dispute ensued and Fisher was asked to leave.
- After exiting, Fisher damaged and spat on vehicles belonging to the household; Victim and his sister recorded her with cell phones outside.
- Fisher got into her car, made a right turn and struck both Victim (Alexander Little) and his sister (Shanita Little); Shanita was carried onto the hood and rolled off, Victim sustained abrasions and chest pain.
- Fisher and her son then drove away; EMS and police responded. Fisher was acquitted of aggravated assault and terroristic threats but convicted after a bench trial of two counts of recklessly endangering another person (REAP) and several related misdemeanors.
- Trial court sentenced Fisher to 12 months’ probation and a $450 fine; Fisher appealed, arguing insufficient evidence for the REAP convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for two REAP convictions (18 Pa.C.S. §2705) | Commonwealth: Evidence showed Fisher consciously steered her car toward the victims, struck them (twice), and thereby recklessly placed them in danger of death or serious bodily injury. | Fisher: Her act of pulling away from the curb was not reckless; she was provoked and had no alternative means to drive without being filmed; evidence insufficient to show danger of death/serious bodily injury. | Court affirmed: viewing evidence in the light most favorable to Commonwealth, Fisher acted recklessly by driving toward and striking the victims, had means to avoid them, and placed them in danger; REAP convictions sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 874 A.2d 108 (Pa. Super. 2005) (sufficiency review standard and deference to fact‑finder)
- Commonwealth v. Bullick, 830 A.2d 998 (Pa. Super. 2003) (fact‑finder may accept or reject witness testimony and weigh evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 382 A.2d 1200 (Pa. 1978) (standard for sufficiency review: view evidence in light most favorable to Commonwealth)
- Commonwealth v. Hughes, 555 A.2d 1264 (Pa. Super. 1989) (both direct and circumstantial evidence considered equally on sufficiency)
- Commonwealth v. French, 578 A.2d 1292 (Pa. Super. 1990) (clarifies sufficiency review principles)
- Commonwealth v. Trowbridge, 395 A.2d 1337 (Pa. Super. 1978) (elements of REAP explained: mens rea of recklessness, conduct, causation, and danger/result)