Com. v. Karenbauer, P.
Com. v. Karenbauer, P. No. 929 WDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jun 8, 2017Background
- In 1996 Peter Michael Karenbauer was convicted of first-degree murder for killing eight-year-old Lacey Johnson; jury imposed death. He confessed and relied on a diminished-capacity defense.
- Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the conviction in 1998 (715 A.2d 1086). In 2002 the trial court resentenced Karenbauer to life without parole under Atkins v. Virginia because of mental retardation.
- Karenbauer filed a PCRA petition in 2013 (amended 2013) asserting newly discovered evidence: a 1995 Lawrence County coroner’s report allegedly inconsistent with his confession (different date of death and no drowning listed).
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition as untimely under the one-year jurisdictional bar, finding Karenbauer failed to prove any statutory timeliness exception applied.
- The court noted the coroner’s report was a public record under 16 P.S. § 1251 and thus not a previously unknown fact; trial counsel had been aware of the report; and Karenbauer produced no evidence the coroner failed to make the report available.
- This appeal challenges the timeliness ruling and asserts prosecutorial nondisclosure and ineffective assistance for failing to obtain psychiatric expert evidence pretrial.
Issues
| Issue | Karenbauer's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness under PCRA one-year bar | The coroner’s 1995 report was newly discovered in 2013 and § 9545(b)(1)(ii) exception applies | Report is a public record and was discoverable earlier; petitioner failed to prove exception | Petition untimely; exception not shown |
| Governmental interference/prosecutorial nondisclosure | DA/AG withheld exculpatory coroner’s report pretrial and during post-conviction | No exclusive government control; report publicly available and counsel knew of it | No prosecutorial misconduct shown; nondisclosure exception inapplicable |
| Due diligence in obtaining report | Could not have obtained report earlier; first learned of contents in 2013 | Petitioner (and trial counsel) were aware of report; no due diligence shown | Petitioner failed to demonstrate due diligence |
| Ineffective assistance for failing to obtain psychiatric evidence pretrial | Trial counsel should have retained psychiatric expert to challenge confession | Issue moot re: timeliness; also previously litigated; no timeliness exception proven | Claim not reached on merits due to untimeliness; PCRA dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Karenbauer, 715 A.2d 1086 (Pa. 1998) (direct appeal affirming conviction; discussed weighing of mental impairment in penalty phase)
- Commonwealth v. Chester, 895 A.2d 520 (Pa. 2006) (public records are not "previously unknown" under § 9545(b)(1)(ii))
- Commonwealth v. Burton, 121 A.3d 1063 (Pa. Super. 2015) (en banc) (presumption of access to public records may not apply to pro se prisoners upon public availability)
- Commonwealth v. Ford, 44 A.3d 1190 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard of review for PCRA court findings)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (U.S. 2002) (death penalty unconstitutional for intellectually disabled defendants)