Com. v. Gary, R.
Com. v. Gary, R. No. 1629 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Apr 24, 2017Background
- Rudolph Gary, a former police officer, shot multiple times during a domestic dispute, killing Howard Williams and wounding Indira Johnson.
- On April 25, 2012 Gary entered a negotiated guilty plea to third-degree murder and aggravated assault and received an aggregate 25–60 year sentence; he did not file a direct appeal.
- Gary filed a timely PCRA petition alleging plea counsel was ineffective (failure to advise about self-defense, failure to investigate/interview witnesses, erroneous sentencing advice) and that newly discovered evidence (discrepancies in Indira Johnson’s civil complaint/recantation) warranted relief or an evidentiary hearing.
- PCRA counsel filed a no-merit letter; the court issued a Pa.R.Crim.P. 907 notice and dismissed the petition in May 2015, granting counsel leave to withdraw.
- The Superior Court reviewed the record, emphasizing the guilty-plea colloquy (Gary acknowledged waiving defenses, was advised of sentencing exposure, and stated plea was voluntary) and found Gary’s ineffectiveness claims vague, undeveloped, and belied by the record.
- The court held that the civil complaint would only provide impeachment and thus is not newly discovered evidence sufficient for PCRA relief; it affirmed the dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Gary's Argument | Commonwealth/PCRA Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plea counsel was ineffective for failing to advise about self-defense and thus caused an involuntary plea | Counsel failed to advise of a possible self-defense instruction; plea was unknowing | Plea colloquy shows Gary knowingly waived defenses; counsel reasonably pursued a plea to avoid greater exposure | Denied — plea was knowing/voluntary; no prejudice shown |
| Whether court erred by not holding an evidentiary hearing on witness recantation | Johnson recanted and earlier testimony was false; an evidentiary hearing is warranted | Claims are vague, unsupported; plea waived right to trial defenses; record does not merit hearing | Denied — no entitlement to hearing; claims belied by plea colloquy |
| Whether counsel gave erroneous sentencing advice (misstating mandatory sentence) causing an involuntary plea | Counsel misstated applicable sentence range, inducing plea | Colloquy and counsel’s strategy show Gary understood exposure and voluntarily accepted plea to reduce risk | Denied — no showing of prejudice or involuntariness |
| Whether Johnson’s civil complaint is newly discovered evidence supporting relief | Discrepancies between police statements and civil complaint would support defense at trial | Plea waived trial defenses; the civil complaint would only impeach credibility and is not newly discovered evidence warranting relief | Denied — impeachment-only material insufficient for relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Fears v. Commonwealth, 86 A.3d 795 (Pa. 2014) (standards for PCRA relief and plea validity analysis)
- Rainey v. Commonwealth, 928 A.2d 215 (Pa. 2007) (review standard for PCRA denials)
- Rounsley v. Commonwealth, 717 A.2d 537 (Pa. Super. 1998) (post-plea collateral review limited to plea validity and sentence legality)
- Wharton v. Commonwealth, 811 A.2d 978 (Pa. 2002) (ineffectiveness claims are not self-proving)
- Bonaccurso v. Commonwealth, 625 A.2d 1197 (Pa. Super. 1993) (after-discovered evidence that only impeaches credibility does not warrant relief)