Com. v. Swift, J., 1446 WDA 2016

August 8, 2015 street altercation between James Swift (Appellant) and neighbor Darryl Henderson; conflicting testimony about who initiated and how severe the contact was; no independent eyewitnesses to the violence.
Appellant originally charged with simple assault, disorderly conduct, and harassment; Commonwealth amended to four summary counts (two harassment, two disorderly conduct); bench trial on April 27–28, 2016.
Defense counsel (Kelli Kleeb, Allegheny Public Defender) filed a motion to withdraw after an impasse; at a February 17, 2016 hearing Judge Sasinoski discussed withdrawal but did not enter a written order; the judge later recused.
Case reassigned to Judge Williams; at trial Judge Williams required Kleeb to represent Swift (Swift chose representation by Kleeb over self-representation); court convicted Swift of one count each of harassment and disorderly conduct and imposed consecutive 90-day probation terms plus fines.
Post-sentence, Swift appealed asserting: (1) judge violated law-of-the-case/coordinate jurisdiction by requiring counsel to continue after withdrawal was granted; (2) verdict was against the weight of the evidence; (3) sentence illegal because he was not credited for one night in custody.

Issue	Appellant's Argument	Commonwealth's Argument	Held
Whether trial judge violated law-of-the-case/coordinate jurisdiction by forcing counsel to continue after an earlier judge granted withdrawal	Judge Sasinoski had excused Kleeb; Judge Williams erred by ignoring that decision	No written/ordered withdrawal existed; no binding ruling requiring Judge Williams to honor an oral withdrawal	Rejected — no order existed, so no law-of-the-case obligation to follow; no error
Whether verdict was against the weight of the evidence	Henderson’s testimony was inconsistent (described both repeated assault and only slight contact); lack of corroboration shows verdict against weight	Trial court credited victim and resolved credibility in Commonwealth’s favor; inconsistencies immaterial	Rejected — trial court’s credibility determination not manifestly erroneous; verdict stands
Whether sentence was illegal for failure to credit one day of jail time served	Swift spent one night in jail and thus was entitled to one day’s credit under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9760(1)	Trial court had omitted time-credit entry but record supports entitlement	Granted in part — appellate court amended sentencing order to add one day’s credit; judgment otherwise affirmed

Commonwealth v. Clay, 64 A.3d 1049 (Pa. 2013) (standard and deference for appellate review of weight claims)
Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745 (Pa. 2000) (deference to trial court on credibility/weight determinations)
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 967 A.2d 1001 (Pa. Super. 2009) (entitlement to credit for time served under § 9760)
Commonwealth v. Dobbs, 682 A.2d 388 (Pa. Super. 1996) (when appellate court may directly correct sentencing order versus remand)