Com. v. Harris, K., 1814 MDA 2015

Kevin Leemon Harris pled guilty on August 25, 2014 to multiple charges including Persons Not to Possess/Use Firearms; received 5–10 years concurrent with an earlier 27–54 month sentence.
Harris later filed a PCRA petition (June 16, 2015) claiming his plea was involuntary because trial counsel was unprepared, coerced him into pleading, and was ineffective for failing to contact potential witnesses and provide discovery.
The PCRA court appointed new counsel, held an evidentiary hearing on September 10, 2015, and heard conflicting testimony from Harris, his brother, and plea counsel Andrea Thompson.
Harris testified he pleaded because counsel lacked witnesses and was unprepared; his brother said he was not contacted and would have testified the gun belonged to someone else.
Counsel Thompson testified she had contacted the brother and mother, had been prepared for trial, obtained a favorable plea (5–10 years concurrent), reviewed the plea colloquy with Harris, and that Harris agreed to plead.
The PCRA court credited Thompson’s testimony, found Harris and his brother not credible, denied the PCRA petition, and the Superior Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Harris’s guilty plea was involuntary because counsel was unprepared/coerced him to plead	Harris: counsel’s lack of preparation and failure to contact witnesses coerced an unknowing plea	Commonwealth/PCRA court: counsel was prepared, contacted witnesses, and negotiated a favorable plea; Harris knowingly pleaded guilty	Court held plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligently entered; credibility favored counsel
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to contact/procure testimony from family witnesses	Harris: counsel did not contact brother/mother and thus deprived defense	Counsel: she spoke with brother and mother, concluded their testimony was not favorable, but retained contact info if needed	Held counsel had reasonable strategic basis; no ineffective assistance shown
Whether counsel’s alleged failures prejudiced Harris so he would have gone to trial	Harris: would have proceeded to trial and obtained a different outcome	Commonwealth: no reasonable probability outcome would differ; Harris admitted guilt in plea colloquy	Held Harris failed to prove prejudice required to vacate plea
Whether evidentiary credibility findings can be disturbed on appeal	Harris: contests trial court credibility findings	Commonwealth: credibility determinations by PCRA court are binding when supported by record	Held appellate court defers to PCRA court’s firsthand credibility findings and affirmed denial

Barndt v. Commonwealth, 74 A.3d 185 (Pa. Super. 2013) (standard of review for PCRA dismissal)
Payne v. Commonwealth, 794 A.2d 902 (Pa. Super. 2002) (ineffectiveness standard under PCRA)
Stevens v. Commonwealth, 739 A.2d 507 (Pa. 1999) (prejudice standard for plea challenges)
Wah v. Commonwealth, 42 A.3d 335 (Pa. Super. 2012) (counsel effectiveness in plea context)
Anderson v. Commonwealth, 995 A.2d 1184 (Pa. Super. 2010) (knowing, voluntary, intelligent plea requirement)
Timchak v. Commonwealth, 69 A.3d 765 (Pa. Super. 2013) (prejudice showing for withdrawn plea)
Johnson v. Commonwealth, 875 A.2d 328 (Pa. Super. 2005) (ineffectiveness must induce plea)
Todd v. Commonwealth, 820 A.2d 707 (Pa. Super. 2003) (deference to PCRA court credibility findings)
Battle v. Commonwealth, 883 A.2d 641 (Pa. Super. 2005) (credibility determinations within PCRA court province)
Cappelli v. Commonwealth, 489 A.2d 813 (Pa. Super. 1985) (defendant bound by statements made during plea colloquy)