Com. v. Jimenez, R.
3328 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 11, 2016Background
- Appellant Rafael Enrique Jimenez was convicted by a jury of multiple counts including aggravated assault and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for stabbing two victims during an intoxication-involved encounter; he was sentenced to 15–30 years imprisonment.
- At trial Commonwealth witnesses and police testified Appellant was heavily intoxicated, threatened victims with a knife, and stabbed one victim; victims testified Appellant placed a knife under a victim’s chin, threatened to slice a throat and attempted to stab a female victim.
- Appellant testified he was assaulted first (punched and sprayed with mace) and then stabbed the victims while they were taking his money, asserting self-defense.
- Appellant filed a timely PCRA petition claiming trial counsel was ineffective for failing to argue Appellant’s voluntary intoxication as evidence supporting his self-defense claim.
- The PCRA court denied relief; the Superior Court affirmed, holding that using voluntary intoxication to negate intent or to convert a self-defense claim into an intoxication-based mitigation was impermissible under Pennsylvania law.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not arguing voluntary intoxication to bolster self-defense | Counsel should have used evidence Appellant was heavily intoxicated to show his subjective fear and support self-defense | That would improperly introduce voluntary intoxication to negate intent and is statutorily and doctrinally precluded | Denied: no arguable merit; using voluntary intoxication to negate intent or create an "imperfect self-defense" was impermissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Morales, 701 A.2d 516 (Pa. 1997) (standard of review for PCRA relief)
- Commonwealth v. Travaglia, 661 A.2d 352 (Pa. 1995) (PCRA review principles)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 966 A.2d 523 (Pa. 2009) (ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Commonwealth v. Hilbert, 382 A.2d 724 (Pa. 1978) (self-defense relates to negating malice/intent)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 634 A.2d 614 (Pa. Super. 1993) (self-defense and malice relationship)
- Commonwealth v. Serge, 837 A.2d 1255 (Pa. Super. 2003) (rejection of imperfect self-defense reduction based on voluntary intoxication)
- Commonwealth v. Sheppard, 648 A.2d 563 (Pa. Super. 1994) (voluntary intoxication is a diminished capacity defense, limited in effect)