Com. v. Gayle, Y., 230 EDA 2016

On January 10, 2012, Philadelphia officers pursued a silver Impala after a report of a robbery; the car fled at high speed and resisted stopping for police signals.
During the chase, Appellant Yassir Gayle (front-seat passenger) leaned out and fired twice at the pursuing police vehicle; projectiles were recovered near the route and from the car.
The car crashed; Gayle and a backseat passenger fled on foot, attempted to stash firearms, resisted arrest, and a gun fell from Gayle’s person and was recovered.
Gayle and co-defendants were unlicensed to carry firearms; trial counsel stipulated to lack of licenses.
A jury convicted Gayle of aggravated assault (2 counts), criminal conspiracy, firearms offenses, and fleeing/attempting to elude police; he was sentenced to 20–40 years plus probation.
On appeal Gayle challenged sufficiency of evidence for fleeing/eluding because he was not the driver; the Superior Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to convict Gayle of fleeing/attempting to elude when he was not the driver	Commonwealth: Gayle participated in a conspiracy to flee; conspirators are liable for co-conspirators' acts in furtherance of the conspiracy	Gayle: He was not the driver and therefore could not be convicted under the Vehicle Code's driver-based fleeing statute	Court: Affirmed — sufficient circumstantial evidence of conspiracy; conspirator liability supports fleeing conviction despite non-driver status

Commonwealth v. Sauers, 159 A.3d 1 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standard for sufficiency review)
Commonwealth v. Devine, 26 A.3d 1139 (Pa. Super. 2011) (flight and circumstantial evidence can support conspiracy inference)
Commonwealth v. Lambert, 795 A.2d 1010 (Pa. Super. 2002) (conspirators liable for co-conspirators' acts in furtherance of conspiracy)