Com. v. Salazar, T.
800 MDA 2024
Pa. Super. Ct.Mar 21, 2025Background
- Theresa R. Salazar drove her minivan into the entrance of the Little League Museum in South Williamsport, Pennsylvania, on July 3, 2022, during a busy holiday weekend, with many employees and patrons present.
- After crashing through the entryway and interior doors, Salazar drove further into the building, stopping after hitting an interior wall; she then issued a threatening statement to an employee.
- Salazar had a longstanding grievance with Little League Baseball, believing her relatives were not properly credited as co-founders, and had contacted the organization multiple times, including voicemails immediately before the incident.
- She was charged with several offenses, including Risking Catastrophe and multiple counts of Recklessly Endangering Another Person (REAP); she was convicted but acquitted of certain aggravated assault and attempted murder charges.
- She was sentenced to consecutive terms totaling 6 to 43 years of incarceration and filed timely post-sentence motions and an appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff’s Argument | Defendant’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Risking Catastrophe | Salazar argued her conduct did not employ a "dangerous means" as required by the statute, nor did it risk widespread harm. | Commonwealth argued that intentionally driving a van into an occupied building during busy hours was inherently risking catastrophe. | Sufficient evidence supported conviction; risk of widespread harm existed. |
| Merger of Sentences for Risking Catastrophe and REAP | Salazar claimed both convictions arose from the same act and should merge for sentencing. | Commonwealth contended the statutory elements for each crime are distinct and do not require merger. | Crimes do not merge because each has at least one unique statutory element. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 236 A.3d 1141 (Pa. Super. 2020) (sets standard of review for sufficiency of evidence challenges)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 172 A.3d 632 (Pa. Super. 2017) (explains review and standards for sufficiency challenges)
- Commonwealth v. McCoy, 199 A.3d 411 (Pa. Super. 2018) (clarifies what constitutes a 'catastrophe' under Pennsylvania law)
- Commonwealth v. Hughes, 364 A.2d 306 (Pa. 1976) (defines reckless creation of risk under catastrophe statute)
- Commonwealth v. Raven, 97 A.3d 1244 (Pa. Super. 2014) (explains the merger of sentences test)