Com. v. Moody, R.
3232 EDA 2012
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- Appellant Raffeyell Moody shot two men in the abdomen on March 31, 2010; both required emergency surgery and one suffered potentially permanent organ impairment.
- A jury convicted Moody of two counts of aggravated assault, carrying a firearm without a license, and possession of an instrument of crime on June 15, 2012.
- On October 24, 2012, the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 23½ to 47 years’ imprisonment (two consecutive 10–20 year terms within the standard range after a "deadly weapon enhancement") plus five years probation.
- Appellant filed a timely direct appeal; appointed counsel filed a petition to withdraw under Anders and an Anders brief raising three issues (sufficiency, weight, and excessive sentence). Appellant pro se raised an Alleyne/mandatory‑minimum challenge.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether counsel complied with Anders technical requirements, performed an independent review of the record, and evaluated both the Alleyne challenge and the Anders issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Moody) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Sufficiency of evidence for aggravated assault, firearms, and PIC | Evidence (victim IDs, witness testimony, recovered revolver, expert trauma testimony) proves elements beyond a reasonable doubt | Evidence insufficient to support convictions | Affirmed: evidence sufficient |
| 2. Weight of the evidence | Verdict should stand; credibility/resolution of conflicts for jury | Verdict against weight of evidence | Waived: Moody failed to preserve a weight claim |
| 3. Discretionary aspects of sentencing (excessive aggregate sentence) | Sentence within guideline range after deadly‑weapon enhancement; discretionary review waived if not preserved | Sentence excessive/abusive discretion | Waived: no post‑sentence motion or oral objection |
| 4. Alleyne / mandatory minimum (legality of sentence under 42 Pa.C.S. §9712) | Commonwealth did not seek or apply §9712; trial court applied guideline deadly‑weapon enhancement instead | Sentence unconstitutional under Alleyne and §9712 (mandatory minimums) | Denied: §9712 was not applied; no Alleyne relief warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (declares facts that increase penalty beyond statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (extends Apprendi to mandatory minimums; aggravating facts that raise minima must be found by a jury)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. Super. 2009) (describes Anders brief requirements)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 23 A.3d 544 (Pa. Super. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Valentine, 101 A.3d 801 (Pa. Super. 2014) (holds §9712 unconstitutional under Alleyne)