Com. v. Pultro, R., 1593 EDA 2015

Rita Pultro was convicted by jury of first‑degree murder, robbery, conspiracy, and carrying a firearm without a license for the fatal shooting of a Rite Aid manager during a robbery on September 19, 2013; she received a life sentence.
Investigation tied co‑defendant David Wiggins to the scene via a palm print; Wiggins implicated Pultro after arrest; other co‑defendants Parks and White pleaded guilty and testified for the Commonwealth.
Pultro was arrested with a cellphone; police obtained a warrant to search the phone and recovered text messages in which the sender (identified by a friend as “Rita”) referenced “caught a body,” laying low, and news coverage of the Rite Aid robbery.
Pultro moved to suppress the cellphone evidence, and sought severance from codefendants Wiggins and Tariq Mahmud; the trial court denied those motions and admitted the text messages at trial.
On appeal Pultro challenged (1) the warrant’s probable cause for the phone search, (2) denial of severance from Wiggins (Bruton/contextual implication), (3) denial of severance from Mahmud (prior bad acts), and (4) authentication of the inculpatory text messages.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of phone search warrant	Warrant lacked probable cause that phone contained evidence (relying on Wright).	Affidavit showed IDs from surveillance, Wiggins’ ID of Pultro, phone communications after shooting, and Pultro’s possession and awareness of investigation.	Warrant valid under totality of circumstances; probable cause existed to search phone.
Severance from Wiggins (Bruton)	Wiggins’ redacted confession still contextually implicated Pultro; redaction insufficient.	Redactions used neutral pronouns, did not name Pultro, and cautionary jury instruction minimized prejudice.	No Bruton violation; redaction and instructions adequate.
Severance from Mahmud (prior bad acts)	Prior robberies by Mahmud (involving others) unfairly prejudiced Pultro who was not involved.	Prior incidents explained motive/plan and how Pultro was later recruited; evidence separable and not unduly inflammatory.	Denial of severance proper; prior acts admissible for context and not unduly prejudicial.
Authentication of text messages	Texts were not properly authenticated—no witness directly tied authorship to Pultro; content could be public/news.	Friend testified they called each other “wife,” messages began “It’s me your wife Rita,” and contents matched insider knowledge; circumstantial authentication sufficed.	Messages properly authenticated by circumstantial evidence; admissible.

Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (U.S. 2014) (warrant generally required to search cellphone contents)
Commonwealth v. Wright, 99 A.3d 565 (Pa. Super. 2012) (suppressing phone seizure where incriminating nature not immediately apparent)
Commonwealth v. Jones, 988 A.2d 649 (Pa. 2010) (totality of circumstances and deference to issuing authority on probable cause)
Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123 (U.S. 1968) (admission of non‑testifying co‑defendant’s confession naming defendant violates confrontation clause)
Commonwealth v. Travers, 768 A.2d 845 (Pa. 2001) (redaction to neutral pronouns plus limiting instruction can avoid Bruton problem)
Commonwealth v. Koch, 39 A.3d 996 (Pa. Super. 2011) (circumstantial evidence can satisfy authentication of electronic communications)