Com. v. Moore, K.
Com. v. Moore, K. No. 1123 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- On December 22, 2013, Ryan Brown knocked on the door of a house on Reno Street to buy drugs; Kwame Moore (Appellant/Defendant) answered, shouted, and shot Brown multiple times; Brown later died.
- Brown was shot five times (including wounds to lung, aorta/heart, and femoral artery); seven cartridge casings at the scene were fired from the same gun, but not from the 9mm found by Brown’s body.
- Three eyewitnesses (Larry Smith, Quaron Highsmith, and Devon Johnson) identified Moore as the shooter; prior statements and grand jury testimony consistent with trial testimony were admitted.
- Moore was tried by jury, convicted of first-degree murder and possession of an instrument of crime, and sentenced to life without parole plus a concurrent term; post-sentence motions and appeal followed.
- Issues on appeal: sufficiency and weight of the evidence (including claim that self-defense was not disproven), and admissibility of testimony that a detective searched "various databases" for addresses associated with Moore.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for 1st-degree murder | Commonwealth: eyewitness IDs, multiple close-range vital-area gunshot wounds, and physical evidence establish intent to kill | Moore: shouting, presence of armed decedent and others, and some casings inside the house show he lacked specific intent and may have acted in self-defense | Affirmed: evidence sufficient to prove specific intent and guilt beyond reasonable doubt |
| Self-defense not disproven beyond a reasonable doubt | Commonwealth: evidence showed Moore opened door and fired multiple times; no reasonable belief of imminent deadly threat or need to retreat | Moore: confronted by armed Brown who approached doorway; claimed fear for life and at most imperfect self-defense/voluntary manslaughter | Affirmed: Commonwealth disproved self-defense; Moore did not preserve imperfect self-defense claim for appeal |
| Weight of the evidence (motion for new trial) | Commonwealth: eyewitness and physical evidence supported verdict; jury credibility choices proper | Moore: argued verdict shocks conscience given alternative narrative (victim armed, little money, shots indicative of panic) | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion; verdict not so contrary as to shock judicial conscience |
| Admission of testimony re: "various databases" | Commonwealth: Detective’s testimony about searching databases was relevant to link Moore to neighborhood/address | Moore: reference implied prior arrests/convictions and was prejudicial (should have been excluded) | Affirmed: admission not an abuse of discretion; mention did not reasonably imply criminal history and could reflect non-criminal databases |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. McFadden, 156 A.3d 299 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standard for review of evidentiary rulings)
- Commonwealth v. Randolph, 873 A.2d 1277 (Pa. 2005) (use of deadly weapon on vital part supports specific intent to kill)
- Commonwealth v. Young, 849 A.2d 1152 (Pa. 2004) (references to prior police contact are not automatically reversible error)
- Commonwealth v. Parker, 104 A.3d 17 (Pa. Super. 2014) (police possession of a photo does not reasonably imply prior conviction)
- Commonwealth v. Baumhammers, 960 A.2d 59 (Pa. 2008) (sufficiency review framework)
- Commonwealth v. Treiber, 874 A.2d 26 (Pa. 2005) (credibility determinations are for factfinder)
- Commonwealth v. Hughes, 865 A.2d 761 (Pa. 2004) (multiple gunshot wounds may support inference of specific intent)
- Commonwealth v. Ramtahal, 33 A.3d 602 (Pa. 2011) (factors relevant to malice and intent in shootings)
- Commonwealth v. Mouzon, 53 A.3d 738 (Pa. 2012) (self-defense in issue only if some evidence supports it)
- Commonwealth v. Diggs, 949 A.2d 873 (Pa. 2008) (standard for awarding a new trial on weight grounds)