Com. v. Jones, K.
Com. v. Jones, K. No. 515 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | May 24, 2017Background
- On Oct. 31, 2014, Harrisburg police stopped a car driven by Kendrith J. Jones for a non‑functioning taillight in a high‑crime area; officer observed furtive movements by Jones and that he started the car after being told he was free to leave.
- Officer McGarrity re‑approached, asked for consent to search; Jones consented to a pat‑down (nothing found) and then consented to a vehicle search.
- Officer saw an empty holster and then the grip of a SIG Sauer P938 under the driver’s seat; gun was registered to Jones’s girlfriend, Amanda (Amber) Uber.
- Uber testified she had placed the gun under the driver’s seat and forgot to tell Jones; she denied Jones knew about or could operate the gun.
- Jones had a prior felony drug conviction that, if proven, made him a person prohibited from possessing firearms; the Commonwealth introduced a certified conviction.
- After two trials (first ended in mistrial), a jury convicted Jones of persons not to possess firearms; trial court sentenced him to 5–10 years. Jones appealed, raising suppression, weight and sufficiency challenges, and a request to bifurcate the prior‑conviction element.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Jones's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Motion to suppress: whether second encounter was an investigative detention | Reengagement after saying Jones was free to go was not coercive; officer merely warned about area and asked to search | Reengagement converted encounter into investigative detention requiring reasonable suspicion; suppression required | Denied — court found totality showed Jones was free to leave and encounter was not a seizure |
| 2. Weight of the evidence: whether verdict shocks justice because Jones did not actually possess or know of gun | Evidence (gun under driver’s seat, visible holster/visible grip, Jones driving) supported constructive possession | Jury verdict against weight; Jones lacked knowledge and actual possession | Denied — trial court’s discretion affirmed; evidence supported constructive possession |
| 3. Sufficiency: whether evidence proved Jones constructively possessed or knew of firearm | Circumstantial evidence (location under driver’s seat, officer saw Jones reach under seat) sufficed to prove constructive possession | Commonwealth failed to prove Jones knew of or controlled the gun | Denied — viewing evidence in Commonwealth’s favor, sufficient proof of constructive possession |
| 4. Bifurcation of prior‑conviction element | Prior conviction was admissible to prove an element of §6105 and not unduly prejudicial | Admission of prior conviction was highly prejudicial and required separate trial/bifurcation | Denied — Supreme Court precedent permits admission of certified prior conviction without unfair prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Nguyen, 116 A.3d 657 (Pa. Super. 2015) (reengagement after "free to go" can create coercive detention depending on totality)
- Commonwealth v. Strickler, 757 A.2d 884 (Pa. 2000) (factors to determine if encounter became a seizure)
- Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745 (Pa. 2000) (standard and deference for appellate review of weight claims)
- Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 67 A.3d 817 (Pa. Super. 2013) (definition and proof of constructive possession/conscious dominion)
- Commonwealth v. Jemison, 98 A.3d 1254 (Pa. 2014) (admission of certified prior conviction to prove predicate element of §6105 is not inherently unfairly prejudicial)