Com. v. Hodges, D., Com. v. Hodges, D. No. 1588 WDA 2016

Dale Hodges was tried in 2014 on multiple sexual-offense charges involving two minor victims; trials consolidated and jury found him guilty on all counts.
During trial, jurors reported difficulty hearing parts of victim M.R.’s testimony (soft-spoken witness); the court questioned the jury the next day and each juror affirmed they had heard enough to make credibility determinations.
No timely objection or motion for mistrial was made during trial; Hodges later filed an untimely post-trial motion claiming juror hearing issues and newly discovered evidence (unsupported at hearing); motion denied.
Hodges was initially sentenced to aggregate terms including mandatory minimums; Superior Court vacated mandatory minimums and he was resentenced in 2016 to an aggregate term of 147 to 311 months.
Hodges filed a timely pro se PCRA petition (appointed counsel filed amended petition) asserting ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to timely move for a mistrial when jurors said they could not hear some testimony; the PCRA court issued Rule 907 notice and dismissed the petition without a hearing.
Hodges appealed; Superior Court affirmed, holding the ineffectiveness claim lacked arguable merit because the record showed jurors affirmed they could fairly and impartially decide despite some difficulty hearing and the transcript was available if any readback were necessary.

Issue	Hodges' Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving for mistrial when jurors reported difficulty hearing testimony	Counsel should have made a timely mistrial motion because jurors’ inability to hear undermined fairness and credibility determinations	No objection was required because jurors affirmed they had heard enough to be fair; the problem was a soft voice, not juror hearing impairment; transcript/readback available	Denied — claim lacked arguable merit; no ineffective assistance because no timely objection was warranted

Commonwealth v. Greiner, 455 A.2d 164 (Pa. Super. 1983) (juror’s unequivocal inability to hear can warrant prejudice and a new trial)
Commonwealth v. Brown, 332 A.2d 828 (Pa. Super. 1974) (significant juror hearing impairment requires disqualification or mistrial)
Commonwealth v. Washington, 927 A.2d 586 (Pa. 2007) (presumption that counsel is effective)
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009) (PCRA ineffective-assistance three-prong test)
Commonwealth v. Ragan, 923 A.2d 1169 (Pa. 2007) (appellate review standard for PCRA denials)
Commonwealth v. Springer, 961 A.2d 1262 (Pa. Super. 2008) (failure to prove any prong of ineffective assistance defeats PCRA claim)