Com. v. Gettel, R.
533 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 7, 2017Background
- On Nov. 26, 2014 a sedan registered to Ruth Gettel was found crashed and on fire; Trooper Rhinehart investigated.
- Gettel initially told police the car had been stolen and she had no knowledge of events after parking it; she later changed her story, naming a person "Chad," then recanted that identification.
- Gettel submitted an insurance claim and a notarized theft affidavit to Safe Auto seeking payment for the vehicle. Safe Auto did not pay the claim.
- Gettel was charged with insurance fraud (18 Pa.C.S. § 4117(a)(2)) and false reports to law enforcement, convicted by a jury on Jan. 24, 2017.
- On Mar. 2, 2017 the court sentenced her to 1 to 12 months’ imprisonment followed by 9 months’ probation; post-sentence motion denied and this timely appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Gettel) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for insurance fraud | Commonwealth argues evidence (false statements to police, insurance claim, theft affidavit) shows knowing intent to defraud and material falsehoods | Gettel contends Commonwealth failed to prove intent to defraud or that any statements were material | Court: Affirmed conviction — reasonable inferences support intent; statute penalizes knowingly submitting false statements in support of a claim |
| Whether sentencing relied improperly on defendant's silence/lack of remorse | Commonwealth argues sentence was within guidelines and based on multiple factors including PSI | Gettel argues the court impermissibly interpreted her silence at sentencing as lack of remorse, warranting resentencing | Court: No abuse of discretion — silence not shown to be sole or controlling factor; court relied on PSI and other considerations |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Thomas, 988 A.2d 669 (Pa. Super. 2009) (standard for sufficiency review and viewing evidence in light most favorable to Commonwealth)
- Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 848 A.2d 977 (Pa. Super. 2004) (intent to commit insurance fraud may be inferred from signing claim forms while knowing facts are untrue)
- Commonwealth v. Pozza, 750 A.2d 889 (Pa. Super. 2000) (insurance fraud statute punished submission of false statements without requiring actual loss to insurer)
- Commonwealth v. Bowen, 975 A.2d 1120 (Pa. Super. 2009) (trial court may consider lack of remorse at sentencing but defendant's silence cannot be sole basis for finding lack of remorse)
- Commonwealth v. Antidormi, 84 A.3d 736 (Pa. Super. 2014) (when a PSI is considered, appellate court presumes sentencing judge was aware of relevant information)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 959 A.2d 1252 (Pa. Super. 2008) (preservation and specificity requirements for Rule 1925(b) sufficiency claims)
- Commonwealth v. Zirkle, 107 A.3d 127 (Pa. Super. 2014) (abuse of discretion standard for sentencing appeals)
- Commonwealth v. Allen, 24 A.3d 1058 (Pa. Super. 2011) (four-part test for invoking appellate review of discretionary sentencing)