Com. v. McLaurin, K., Com. v. McLaurin, K. No. 1686 WDA 2016

McLaurin charged in March 2016 with criminal homicide and related offenses in Erie County.
May 2016 preliminary hearing relied primarily on Det. Lorah’s testimony; witnesses' statements were introduced.
Two videotaped witness statements (Porter, Husband) were presented; defense objected as hearsay and due process violation.
Arresting officers did not testify at the preliminary hearing; hearsay evidence potentially established a prima facie case.
McLaurin petitioned for writ of habeas corpus; trial court denied; appellate interlocutory review sought.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether exceptional circumstances warrant appellate review of habeas denial	McLaurin argues exceptional circumstances exist to review.	Commonwealth argues no extraordinary circumstance present; no jurisdiction to review.	No appellate jurisdiction; extraordinary circumstances not present.
Whether affiant’s hearsay alone suffices to establish prima facie at preliminary hearing	Hearsay alone suffices under Ricker to hold for trial.	Hearsay alone not constitutionally required to be confronted; prima facie shown by hearsay.	Ricker controls; hearsay alone can establish prima facie; superior court lacks jurisdiction to revisit.
Whether there was legally admissible evidence beyond hearsay to establish prima facie on charges	Evidence including statements and other items could support prima facie case.	If only hearsay evidence exists, due process concerns arise but still may sustain.	Because Ricker controls, appeal merits not reached; extraordinary circumstances lacking.

Commonwealth v. Ricker, 120 A.3d 349 (Pa. Super. 2015) (hearsay may establish prima facie and no right to confrontation at pretrial)
Commonwealth v. McClelland, --- A.3d --- (Pa. Super. 2017) (preliminary hearing with hearsay; due process implications discussed)
Commonwealth v. Ricker, 135 A.3d 175 (Pa. 2016) (supreme court review of Ricker questions; dispositive for appealability)