Com. v. Rosario, K.
248 A.3d 599
Pa. Super. Ct.2021Background
- On Sept. 5–6, 2017, Marcus Stancik was abducted, assaulted, forced into a vehicle, and shot in the neck; he survived. Police identified Keith Rosario as a suspect.
- Police went to Rosario’s home; a teen, Tyree King, said he was house-/dog-sitting and consented to a search; officers recovered a .40 caliber handgun.
- Rosario was charged with attempt homicide, two counts of aggravated assault, two counts of kidnapping, and one count of conspiracy (naming Richard Lacks as co-conspirator).
- A jury convicted Rosario; trial court sentenced him to an aggregate 35½ to 90 years. The court later corrected a clerical sentencing error to reflect conspiracy sentencing was for aggravated assault only.
- On appeal the Superior Court: affirmed denial of suppression and the convictions; but, applying recent precedent, vacated the conspiracy sentence (inchoate sentencing conflict) and vacated the two kidnapping sentences as duplicative, and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Rosario's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Suppression: validity of consent search by Tyree King | Police reasonably relied on King’s apparent authority to consent given his statements he was house‑sitting and facts at scene | King was a teen (16–17) and lacked authority; officers doubted King and believed Rosario might be inside so consent was not reasonable | Denial of suppression affirmed — officers reasonably could conclude King had apparent authority (Strader standard) |
| 2) Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy conviction | Circumstantial proof (phone call, joint search/drive, Lacks’s acts, shared conduct) supported an agreement and overt acts | No evidence of an agreement or shared criminal intent; acts were spontaneous and individual | Conviction for conspiracy affirmed — jury could infer agreement and overt acts from circumstantial evidence |
| 3) Discretionary sentencing (excessiveness, rehabilitation) | Sentencing court considered PSI, character letters, prior failures at rehabilitation, and crime brutality; consecutive terms justified | Aggregate sentence disproportionate, failed to consider Rosario as individual, implied unreliability of rehabilitation | No abuse of discretion found as to sentencing rationale; trial court considered §9721(b) factors |
| 4) Eighth Amendment/cruel and unusual punishment | Sentence not grossly disproportionate to extraordinarily violent facts | Aggregate sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment | No constitutional violation — failed Spells/Solem threshold for gross disproportionality |
| 5) Legality of sentences: §906 (inchoate crimes) and two kidnapping convictions | Claimed distinct objectives / multiple kidnappings justified separate sentences | §906 bars convictions/sentences for multiple inchoate crimes designed to culminate in same crime; kidnapping subsections are alternative means so cannot yield separate punishments for one episode | Sentence vacated in part: under Commonwealth v. King, cannot separately sentence attempt and conspiracy where objects overlap — conspiracy sentence vacated; under Lopez, two kidnapping sentences vacated as duplicative; remand for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Strader, 931 A.2d 630 (Pa. 2007) (apparent‑authority third‑party consent test for warrantless searches)
- Commonwealth v. King, 234 A.3d 549 (Pa. 2020) (§906 prohibits multiple inchoate punishments when objects coincide)
- Commonwealth v. Lopez, 663 A.2d 746 (Pa. Super. 1995) (statutory alternatives using “or” are alternative means; cannot impose multiple punishments for a single act under those alternatives)
- Solem v. Helm, 463 U.S. 277 (U.S. 1983) (framework for Eighth Amendment proportionality review)
- Commonwealth v. Yandamuri, 159 A.3d 503 (Pa. 2017) (standard of appellate review for suppression rulings)