Com. v. Thiers, J.
3465 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Nov 29, 2017Background
- On October 19, 2013, Joseph Oesterle Thiers shot and wounded two civilians at Double Visions and then fled; police pursued in a high-speed chase.
- Thiers stopped, hid behind a tree, pointed a .22 revolver at Officers Ortiz and Reguera, and fired multiple shots; the officers were not hit.
- On January 9, 2015, Thiers entered an open guilty plea to four counts of aggravated assault (two counts for the civilian victims, two counts for the attempted assault of the officers).
- Sentencing on June 22, 2015 imposed an aggregate 22 to 44 years’ incarceration (standard-range terms, consecutive for each victim/officer).
- Thiers filed a post-sentence motion to modify sentence (not to withdraw the plea); the motion was denied. He appealed, raising plea validity, counsel preventing a statement at plea, sufficiency/factual basis for two officer-related aggravated assaults, and merger/illegal sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Thiers' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Plea validity (knowing, voluntary, intelligent) | Plea was not knowing/voluntary; he did not understand charges, lacked factual basis, and was not advised of maximum sentences | Defendant waived these claims by failing to object at plea/sentencing or move to withdraw within 10 days | Waived — claims not preserved for appeal |
| 2. Counsel prevented making a statement at guilty plea | He wished to speak but was not permitted | Same preservation/waiver argument | Waived — not raised below |
| 3. Sufficiency/factual basis for two aggravated assaults against officers | Insufficient evidence to support two separate first‑degree aggravated assaults of officers | Plea colloquy and record show he "fired shots" at both officers; claims waived for failing to preserve | Waived — not preserved for appeal |
| 4. Merger / legality of sentencing for officer assaults | Sentences should merge because acts arose from a single criminal act | Crimes did not merge: multiple shots at two separate officers are distinct criminal acts and separately harm each victim | Rejected — no merger; sentences lawful |
Key Cases Cited
- Pantalion v. Commonwealth, 957 A.2d 1267 (Pa. Super. 2008) (guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defects)
- Monjaras‑Amaya v. Commonwealth, 163 A.3d 466 (Pa. Super. 2017) (procedural preservation required to challenge plea)
- Lincoln v. Commonwealth, 72 A.3d 606 (Pa. Super. 2013) (failure to preserve plea-related claims results in waiver)
- Robinson v. Commonwealth, 931 A.2d 15 (Pa. Super. 2007) (merger is a non-waivable legality-of-sentence claim)
- Baldwin v. Commonwealth, 985 A.2d 830 (Pa. 2009) (statutory test for merger: single criminal act and overlapping statutory elements)
- Yates v. Commonwealth, 562 A.2d 908 (Pa. Super. 1989) (distinct criminal acts against multiple victims do not merge; each victim is protected individually)