Com. v. Hoffman, L.
2277 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 9, 2016Background
- Heather Lynn Hoffman was tried for offenses arising from an ER incident in which she faked a seizure and threw a clipboard at a nurse, causing a minor eye injury; jury convicted her of Simple Assault (and summary Disorderly Conduct and Harassment) but acquitted her of Aggravated Assault.
- After the Commonwealth rested, defense intended to present a character witness to testify to Hoffman's reputation for peacefulness and nonviolence.
- The prosecutor notified defense counsel the morning of the witness that Hoffman had prior convictions: one stalking (2003) and two summary harassment convictions, which the Commonwealth intended to use to impeach the character witness.
- Defense objected, arguing the Commonwealth had not provided facts underlying the prior convictions and that those convictions were not probative of violent character; the court ruled the stalking and harassment convictions were relevant to peacefulness and could be used on cross-examination if the character witness testified.
- Defense declined to call the character witness; jury convicted Hoffman of Simple Assault; trial court sentenced her to 2 days to 23 months; Hoffman appealed the trial court’s ruling allowing the Commonwealth to impeach a character witness with her prior convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in permitting the Commonwealth to impeach a defense character witness with Hoffman's prior stalking and harassment convictions | Commonwealth: cross-examination on convictions is permissible to test witness credibility once defendant opens the door on reputation for peacefulness | Hoffman: prior convictions were not shown to involve violence; facts were unknown so convictions are not probative of peacefulness and admission was prejudicial | The court affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; stalking and harassment convictions were sufficiently related to peacefulness to permit impeachment of a character witness |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hull, 982 A.2d 1020 (Pa. Super. 2009) (discussed by appellant but found distinguishable)
- Commonwealth v. Hoover, 16 A.3d 1148 (Pa. Super. 2011) (trial-court discretion over scope of cross-examination and impeachment)
- Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 861 A.2d 898 (Pa. 2004) (once defendant offers reputation evidence, prosecution may probe witness knowledge of convictions related to trait)
- Commonwealth v. Adams, 626 A.2d 1231 (Pa. Super. 1993) (distinguishes proving particular bad acts from testing credibility/knowledge of reputation)
- Commonwealth v. Becker, 191 A. 351 (Pa. 1937) (historic articulation of distinction between proving acts and testing witness familiarity/standard)
- Commonwealth v. Hurt, 60 A.2d 828 (Pa. Super. 1948) (cross-examination to test credibility permitted if purpose is to test reputation knowledge, not to prove other crimes)