Com. v. Lyde, T.
387 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- Torrence Deonta Lyde was arrested after a confidential informant purchased heroin; officers found Lyde in an apartment bathroom and tasered him during arrest. He was convicted by jury of PWID, conspiracy to commit PWID, possession, reckless endangerment, and resisting arrest and sentenced to aggregate 4.5–15 years.
- Direct appeal was filed but this Court found several claims waived (weight for lack of post-sentence motion; sufficiency for failure to develop on appeal) and Lyde did not seek allocatur.
- Lyde filed a timely pro se PCRA petition; the PCRA court held a hearing and granted partial relief: it found mandatory-minimum PWID sentences illegal under Alleyne, reinstated Lyde’s direct-appeal rights as to sufficiency and weight claims, and found prior counsel ineffective for failing to preserve those direct-appeal issues.
- The PCRA court denied Lyde’s other ineffectiveness claims on the merits and directed resentencing; the trial court resentenced Lyde on May 1, 2017 to concurrent 2–10 year terms for the PWID convictions.
- On appeal from the PCRA order, the Superior Court (1) affirmed the Alleyne-based resentencing relief and reinstatement of direct-appeal rights generally, (2) held the PCRA court erred by adjudicating other "prolix" ineffectiveness claims once direct-appeal rights were reinstated, and (3) vacated and remanded the portion reinstating Lyde’s weight claim without deciding whether nunc pro tunc post-sentence motions should be allowed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lyde) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for convictions | Trial evidence supported convictions | Waiver/unchallenged on direct appeal | Court did not decide on merits here; PCRA reinstated direct-appeal right as to sufficiency but prior appeal waiver issues remain for direct review |
| Weight of the evidence (PWID & REAP) | Verdicts against weight; trial counsel ineffective for not preserving via post-sentence motion | Claim was waived because post-sentence motion not filed | Superior Court vacated PCRA’s reinstatement of weight claim and remanded to determine whether nunc pro tunc post-sentence motions should be granted (further proceedings required) |
| Counsel ineffective for failing to preserve issues on direct appeal | Prior counsel was ineffective for not filing post-sentence motions and not preserving issues | Commonwealth argued claims were waived or meritless | Court found counsel ineffective to the extent it reinstated direct-appeal rights for some claims but held PCRA erred by resolving other ineffectiveness claims after reinstating appeal rights; ordered further proceedings on nunc pro tunc relief |
| PCRA court’s authority to decide other ineffectiveness claims after reinstating direct appeal | Lyde sought adjudication of multiple ineffectiveness claims in the PCRA proceeding | Commonwealth relied on PCRA court’s factual findings | Court held that once PCRA reinstated direct-appeal rights it should not have adjudicated the remaining "prolix" ineffectiveness claims (Holmes/Harris); those rulings vacated for lack of proper procedure |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (mandatory-minimum facts must be found by jury)
- Commonwealth v. Holmes, 79 A.3d 562 (Pa. 2013) (ineffective-assistance claims generally deferred to PCRA; limited exceptions)
- Commonwealth v. Rosado, 150 A.3d 425 (Pa. 2016) (distinguishing errors that foreclose review vs. narrow waiver; counsel’s failure to preserve can waive issues but not always foreclose appellate review)
- Commonwealth v. Liston, 977 A.2d 1089 (Pa. 2009) (reinstatement of direct appeal rights does not automatically reinstate right to file post-sentence motions nunc pro tunc)
- Commonwealth v. Reaves, 923 A.2d 1119 (Pa. 2007) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Commonwealth v. Grant, 813 A.2d 726 (Pa. 2002) (ineffective-assistance claims should be deferred to PCRA review)
- Commonwealth v. Watley, 153 A.3d 1034 (Pa. Super. 2016) (PCRA orders granting some relief and denying other claims are final for appeal)