Com. v. Morgan, A., Com. v. Morgan, A. No. 83 WDA 2016

Background

Victim Deon Thomas was found fatally stabbed in Sept. 2004; investigators collected unknown DNA at the scene but had no comparison sample then.
Anthony Morgan (customer of the victim) denied involvement in 2004; investigators reopened the case in 2010, obtained Morgan’s DNA, which matched crime-scene samples; Morgan absconded and was arrested in 2011.
Morgan was tried by jury, asserted self-defense (testified he disarmed and stabbed the victim); convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Morgan filed a timely pro se PCRA petition in 2015; counsel filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter addressing multiple claims and sought withdrawal; PCRA court issued Rule 907 notice and dismissed the petition after Morgan filed a pro se response.
On appeal, Morgan raised numerous claims (ineffective assistance, Brady, prosecutorial misconduct, evidentiary errors); the Superior Court reviewed the record, found many claims waived or meritless, and affirmed the PCRA denial without an evidentiary hearing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Morgan)	Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth / PCRA court)	Held
Waiver of early claims	Morgan contends many trial and counsel errors justify relief	PCRA court: many issues were not raised below or were presented in different forms; Pa.R.A.P. 302 bars new arguments on appeal	Waived — Superior Court affirmed dismissal for failure to preserve claims
Adequacy of PCRA Rule 907 disposition / right to be heard	Morgan argues the court failed to rule separately on his Rule 907 response and deprived him of process	Rule 907 requires dismissal, leave to amend, or continuation; the court’s dismissal encompassed consideration of the response	Denied — no error; dismissal complied with Rule 907
Ineffective assistance — failure to cross-examine witness about victim’s prior violence	Morgan: counsel should have impeached McHirella with victim’s alleged prior assaults to support self-defense	Commonwealth/PCRA court: Morgan presented no proof of prior acts, no showing of admissibility (reputation or convictions), and failed to meet ineffective-assistance elements	Denied — claim lacked arguable merit and admissible evidence; no relief
Brady claim based on delay between DNA collection and arrest	Morgan: delay between DNA taken (allegedly 2004) and arrest (2011) violated due process/Brady	PCRA court/Commonwealth: Brady requires suppressed favorable evidence; investigators did not take Morgan’s DNA until 2010 and matched it to 2004 samples; delay caused by Morgan absconding	Denied — misstates record; no Brady suppression shown; claim fails

Key Cases Cited

Turner v. Murray, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (procedural framework for counsel withdrawal and no-merit letter practice)
Finley v. Pennsylvania, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (no-merit letter and counsel withdrawal standards)
Commonwealth v. Smith, 416 A.2d 986 (Pa. 1980) (admissibility of victim’s prior violent acts and reputation in self-defense cases)
Commonwealth v. Williams, 732 A.2d 1167 (Pa. 1999) (presumption of counsel effectiveness in PCRA ineffective-assistance analysis)
Commonwealth v. Fulton, 830 A.2d 567 (Pa. 2003) (three-prong test for ineffective assistance under PCRA)
Commonwealth v. Daniels, 963 A.2d 409 (Pa. 2009) (failure to satisfy any prong of ineffectiveness test requires rejection)
Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795 (Pa. 2014) (standard of review for PCRA denial)
Commonwealth v. Spotz, 84 A.3d 294 (Pa. 2014) (scope of review limited to PCRA court findings and record)
Commonwealth v. Khalifah, 852 A.2d 1238 (Pa. Super. 2004) (review when PCRA petition denied without evidentiary hearing)
Commonwealth v. Lambert, 884 A.2d 848 (Pa. 2005) (elements of a Brady claim)
Commonwealth v. Weiss, 81 A.3d 767 (Pa. 2013) (Brady elements articulated)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (prosecution must disclose favorable, material evidence)
Smith v. Cain, 132 S. Ct. 627 (U.S. 2012) (Brady and materiality standard)