Com. v. Thompson, R.
958 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 21, 2017Background
- Ricky Wayne Thompson was convicted by a jury of multiple sexual and related offenses and, at sentencing, the Commonwealth sought a 25-year mandatory minimum under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9718.2 based on a prior New Jersey conviction for possession of child pornography.
- The Commonwealth introduced a three‑page New Jersey judgment of conviction certified by a Special Deputy Clerk (but bearing no visible court seal) to establish the predicate conviction at sentencing.
- Thompson objected that (1) the out‑of‑state document lacked the seal required by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5328 and thus was not self‑authenticating under Pa.R.E. 902; (2) the Commonwealth failed to provide written notice that New Jersey law would be at issue under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5327; and (3) the court did not have a “complete record” of his prior conviction as required by § 9718.2.
- The trial court admitted the New Jersey document, applied the 25‑year mandatory minimums (concurrent) under § 9718.2, and imposed an aggregate sentence of 25 to 50 years.
- Thompson filed post‑sentence motions raising the authentication, notice, completeness, and Alleyne (constitutional) challenges; the trial court denied relief and Thompson appealed. The Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Thompson's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of NJ judgment (seal/authentication) | Document lacked required seal under § 5328 and Pa.R.E. 902, so inadmissible | Document was certified by Special Deputy Clerk and authentic; absence of seal a technical defect | Court: document lacked a § 5328 seal but admission was within trial court’s discretion; no abuse of discretion (no dispute of conviction) |
| Notice that NJ law would be used (§ 5327) | Commonwealth failed to give written notice that New Jersey law/statute would be relied on at sentencing | Commonwealth provided on‑the‑record oral notice after verdict and a written § 9718.2 notice the next day (naming intent to seek mandatory term) | Court: formal § 5327 written notice lacking, but Thompson had actual/constructive notice and was not prejudiced; harmless error |
| "Complete record" of prior convictions (§ 9718.2) | § 9718.2 requires a "complete record" (charging papers, plea colloquy, transcripts), not just a judgment copy | § 9718.2 only requires proof of prior qualifying conviction; a certified judgment suffices to show conviction | Court: "complete record" means a complete listing/record of prior convictions for sentencing; full case file not required; certified copy adequate |
| Alleyne/legality of mandatory minimum under § 9718.2 | § 9718.2 requires the court to make a factual equivalency determination about out‑of‑state offense, so Alleyne requires jury finding beyond a reasonable doubt | § 9718.2 (like § 9714) is triggered by prior convictions; equivalency is a legal determination for the court, not a fact increasing penalty | Court: Alleyne inapplicable; exception for prior convictions controls; equivalency is a question of law for the judge; sentence lawful |
| Rule 1925(b) supplementation / sufficiency claims | Trial court abused discretion by denying leave to supplement 1925(b) after counsel received transcripts | Counsel represented defendant at trial and knew sufficiency bases; no good cause to supplement | Court: denial not abuse of discretion; sufficiency claims waived for lack of specificity in 1925(b) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Belknap, 105 A.3d 7 (Pa. Super. 2014) (standard of review for evidentiary admissibility)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 52 A.3d 1139 (Pa. 2012) (authentication and evidentiary discretion principles)
- Commonwealth v. Gibbs, 981 A.2d 274 (Pa. Super. 2009) (Rule 1925(b) specificity requirement for sufficiency claims)
- Commonwealth v. Smith, 563 A.2d 905 (Pa. Super. 1989) (requirement of official seal/authentication under § 5328)
- Rhoads v. Commonwealth, 620 A.2d 659 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993) (seal technicality under § 5328)
- Commonwealth v. Manley, 985 A.2d 256 (Pa. Super. 2009) (§ 5327 written notice requirement and judicial notice of foreign law)
- Commonwealth v. Norris, 819 A.2d 568 (Pa. Super. 2003) (what constitutes "reasonable notice" for mandatory minimum notice provisions)
- Commonwealth v. Northrip, 985 A.2d 734 (Pa. 2009) (standard for determining equivalency of out‑of‑state convictions)
- Commonwealth v. Bragg, 133 A.3d 328 (Pa. Super. 2016) (Alleyne does not invalidate mandatory penalties based on prior convictions)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (any fact that increases penalty must be found beyond a reasonable doubt, with exception for prior convictions)