Com. v. Pettis, A.
Com. v. Pettis, A. No. 914 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Apr 24, 2017Background
- On May 26, 2014, Andrew Webber, intoxicated after visiting a bar, went to a hotel expecting to meet a prostitute; Alex Pettis confronted him in the room and, according to Webber, pointed a silver revolver at his head and demanded $80.00.
- Webber drove away with Pettis hanging on the car; the car hit a hotel wall, Pettis was thrown free and dropped the gun; Webber retrieved the weapon and called police; Pettis and a woman fled.
- Surveillance video captured the incident; Webber identified Pettis in a photo array two days later.
- Pettis testified at trial he intervened peacefully over a fee dispute and carried a silver water bottle, not a gun; a jury convicted him of robbery, simple assault, recklessly endangering another person, and possessing an instrument of a crime.
- After sentencing to an aggregate 7 to 20 years (aggravated range on robbery), Pettis obtained PCRA relief to reinstate direct appeal rights nunc pro tunc and appealed several claims; the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discretionary aspects of sentence (aggravated-range) | Sentence excessive given facts and background; court failed to state adequate reasons | Court considered PSI, prior violent conduct, courtroom behavior, and offense gravity; reasons were on record | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion; court adequately stated reasons and considered PSI |
| Sufficiency of evidence | Evidence insufficient to prove elements beyond a reasonable doubt | Evidence (victim ID, surveillance, events, dropped gun) supports convictions | Waived — 1925(b) statement too generic; also primarily challenges credibility (weight) not sufficiency |
| Weight of evidence | Victim intoxicated; verdict against weight and shocks conscience | Credibility determinations for jury; trial court properly denied new trial | Denied — trial court did not palpably abuse discretion; verdict not shocking |
| Colloquy about right not to testify | Court’s colloquy was confusing and misleading, so testimony invalidly waived | Court fully apprised Pettis; no contemporaneous objection; Pettis elected to testify | Waived — failure to object at trial and not raised in post-sentence motion |
| Cross-examination referencing incarceration | Question improperly suggested prior convictions/incarceration, requiring new trial | Pettis himself raised his criminal history and referenced 18 months in Dauphin County; no contemporaneous objection | Waived — no contemporaneous objection; issue first raised on appeal; court noted Pettis’s own testimony highlighted incarceration |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Dunphy, 20 A.3d 1215 (Pa. Super. 2011) (discretionary aspects of sentence are not absolute)
- Commonwealth v. Edwards, 71 A.3d 323 (Pa. Super. 2013) (four-part test for discretionary sentencing review on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Bromley, 862 A.2d 598 (Pa. Super. 2004) (claim that court imposed aggravated-range sentence without adequate reasons raises substantial question)
- Commonwealth v. Clarke, 70 A.3d 1281 (Pa. Super. 2013) (standard for abuse of discretion in sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Ventura, 975 A.2d 1128 (Pa. Super. 2009) (PSI presumptively provides sentencing judge relevant background; stating PSI review can satisfy on-the-record reasons)
- Commonwealth v. Stiles, 143 A.3d 968 (Pa. Super. 2016) (1925(b) statement must specify elements challenged for sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Boyd, 73 A.3d 1269 (Pa. Super. 2013) (appellate standard for weight claims; limited review of trial court’s ruling)
- Commonwealth v. Weathers, 95 A.3d 908 (Pa. Super. 2014) (trial court’s denial of weight claim is highly deferential)
- Commonwealth v. Griffin, 65 A.3d 932 (Pa. Super. 2013) (attacking witness credibility is a weight, not sufficiency, challenge)
- Commonwealth v. Melendez-Rodriguez, 856 A.2d 1278 (Pa. Super. 2004) (failure to make contemporaneous objection waives claim on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Phillips, 141 A.3d 512 (Pa. Super. 2016) (issues not raised below are waived on appeal)