Com. v. Knott, T.
778 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 28, 2017Background:
- In early 2015 Travis E. Knott was charged with theft of a cow; charges were withdrawn after he produced a purchase receipt and later refiled when the receipt was alleged forged.
- On December 3, 2015 Knott pleaded nolo contendere to one count of third-degree forgery as part of a negotiated disposition; sentencing (Feb 8, 2016) imposed four years of intermediate punishment (three months restrictive house arrest, remainder on restorative sanctions) plus fines and fees.
- Knott filed a counseled PCRA petition (June 20, 2016) asserting ineffective assistance of plea counsel and that his plea was involuntary because counsel failed to investigate witnesses and otherwise misadvised him.
- An evidentiary PCRA hearing was held (Feb 13, 2017) where plea counsel and Knott testified; the PCRA court denied relief (Apr 12, 2017); Knott appealed to the Superior Court which affirmed (Dec 28, 2017).
- The courts found no arguable merit or prejudice from counsel’s actions: counsel reviewed and discussed the written and oral plea colloquy with Knott, Knott affirmed the plea was knowing and voluntary, and Knott produced no evidence that uninvestigated witnesses would have provided exculpatory evidence relevant to the forgery charge.
Issues:
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Respondent / Court's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failure to investigate/interview witnesses | Knott: counsel failed to investigate witnesses who could show he lawfully purchased the cow, causing involuntary plea | Counsel testified Knott never provided witness names; no evidence those witnesses would have produced exculpatory evidence on the forgery charge | Denied — claim lacks arguable merit and no prejudice shown |
| Plea involuntariness / induced plea by counsel | Knott: counsel pressured or misadvised him into pleading (threats about jail/prison), rendering plea unknowing and involuntary | Record: signed written colloquy, oral plea colloquy where Knott affirmed understanding and voluntariness; counsel discussed risks and benefits | Denied — plea was knowing, voluntary, intelligent |
| Counsel failed to investigate/advise about ability to serve house arrest (residency in MD) | Knott: counsel should have investigated whether he could lawfully serve house arrest at his Maryland residence | Court: housing was discussed; defendant given time and options (trailer in Adams County, GPS at campground); responsibility for securing residence rested with defendant | Denied — no ineffective assistance shown |
| Failure to file post-sentence motion / poor communication | Knott: counsel refused to file post-sentence motion and ignored calls | Court: no credible evidence counsel refused; counsel met and spoke several times; Knott initialed plea form indicating satisfaction with counsel | Denied — not supported and no prejudice established |
Key Cases Cited
- Turetsky v. Pennsylvania, 925 A.2d 876 (Pa. Super. 2007) (sets out three-prong ineffective assistance test)
- Moser v. Commonwealth, 921 A.2d 526 (Pa. Super. 2007) (ineffectiveness claims tied to voluntariness of plea)
- Gunter v. Commonwealth, 771 A.2d 767 (Pa. 2001) (post-sentencing plea withdrawal requires manifest injustice)
- Howard v. Pennsylvania, 719 A.2d 233 (Pa. 1998) (deference to counsel strategy with reasonable basis)
- Leidig v. Commonwealth, 850 A.2d 743 (Pa. Super. 2004) (nolo contendere treated same as guilty plea)