Com. v. Lowry, D.
Com. v. Lowry, D. No. 1338 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 25, 2017Background
- Appellant Deschae (De-Schae) Lowry was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder and theft for fatally strangling the victim on August 1, 2014, then taking her car to Florida.
- The Commonwealth sought and the trial court admitted evidence of prior bad acts under Pa.R.E. 404(b), including domestic-violence incidents, threats, a prior assault, theft of money and the victim’s car, and protection-from-abuse (PFA) petitions/orders.
- Witnesses who testified about the prior acts included friends/co-workers (Tyeria Sanders, Caren Tribble, Cindy Void), a court clerk (Sandra Robinson) about PFAs, and Officer Michael DeHoratius about a PFA violation.
- The trial court gave limiting instructions after each relevant witness, telling jurors the 404(b) evidence was for malice, intent, motive, and chain of events—not propensity.
- Lowry appealed, arguing the prior-acts evidence was unfairly prejudicial and its probative value did not outweigh prejudice; the Superior Court affirmed, adopting the trial court’s opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by admitting prior bad-acts evidence under Pa.R.E. 404(b) | Commonwealth: prior acts were relevant to malice, intent, motive, and to show the chain/sequence leading to death | Lowry: 404(b) evidence was more prejudicial than probative and impermissibly showed bad character/propensity | Court: No abuse of discretion; 404(b) evidence related to events within ~3 years, was probative of malice/intent/motive and sequence; limiting instructions mitigated prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Ballard, 622 Pa. 177, 80 A.3d 380 (2013) (standard for reviewing admissibility of evidence and trial-court discretion)
- Commonwealth v. Drumheller, 570 Pa. 117, 808 A.2d 893 (2002) (relevance and probative-value principles)
- Commonwealth v. Collins, 550 Pa. 46, 703 A.2d 418 (1997) (permitted uses of other-crimes evidence under Rule 404(b))
- Commonwealth v. Melendez-Rodriguez, 856 A.2d 1278 (Pa. Super. 2004) (other-crimes evidence admissible for motive, intent, absence of mistake, common scheme, identity)