Com. v. Rogers, R.
Com. v. Rogers, R. No. 2799 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Aug 16, 2017Background
- On August 23, 2006, a shootout between Ronald Rogers (Appellant) and Demetrius Hayes killed an innocent bystander; both were charged.
- Tyrone Singleton was a key eyewitness who previously testified consistently (in police statement, preliminary hearing, and at Hayes's trial) that Rogers fired first; Hayes was acquitted at his trial partly on that testimony.
- At Rogers's 2011 jury trial, Singleton initially testified that Hayes shot first; the trial court excused the jury, admonished and warned Singleton about perjury, and threatened severe consequences; defense counsel made no objection.
- The next day Singleton recanted his initial testimony and again testified that Rogers fired first; Rogers was convicted of third-degree murder and related offenses and sentenced to 16–32 years.
- Rogers filed a timely PCRA petition alleging trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the court's admonition (which coerced Singleton) and for other issues; the PCRA court dismissed without an evidentiary hearing.
- The Superior Court concluded the ineffective-assistance claim regarding counsel's failure to object had arguable merit (drawing on Fornicoia and Laws), vacated the PCRA dismissal, and remanded for an evidentiary hearing so the remaining Strickland/PCRA prongs could be addressed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the trial court's admonition of Singleton | Rogers: court pressured witness, coerced recant, deprived Rogers of due process; counsel should have objected and preserved issue | Commonwealth: court's comments were within discretion; physical evidence supported Commonwealth's version; PCRA dismissal proper | Superior Court: Counsel's failure to object has arguable merit; remanded for evidentiary hearing to evaluate prejudice and reasonableness |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Fornicoia, 650 A.2d 891 (Pa. Super. 1994) (trial judge's pressure on witness to change testimony required new trial)
- Commonwealth v. Laws, 378 A.2d 812 (Pa. 1977) (trial court's admonition that signaled which testimony it believed was reversible error)
- Commonwealth v. Hanible, 30 A.3d 426 (Pa. 2011) (generally require evidentiary hearing to assess counsel's reasonable basis absent clear record)
- Commonwealth v. Andrews, 158 A.3d 1260 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standard for proving PCRA ineffective-assistance claim)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 927 A.2d 586 (Pa. 2007) (counsel's actions are judged for reasonable basis, not by hindsight)