Com. v. Walker, H.
696 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jan 12, 2017Background
- On Feb. 19, 2015, nine transactions totaling over $900 were made at Redner’s using account information linked to Kenija Gilbert’s access device.
- Store surveillance showed Haniyyah Walker manually entering numbers at checkout timed to the transactions; a transaction report matched the timestamps.
- Gilbert testified she had earlier given Walker temporary possession of her access card but revoked authorization the night before the transactions and got the card back.
- Walker was tried by bench trial and convicted of access device fraud and identity theft (both first‑degree misdemeanors); acquitted of receiving stolen property. She was sentenced to two years’ probation and $500 restitution.
- Walker filed a pro se timely appeal but her Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement generically claimed the evidence was insufficient without specifying which elements were contested.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for access device fraud and identity theft | Commonwealth: Video + transaction report + victim testimony proved Walker used Gilbert’s account/PIN without authorization to obtain goods | Walker: Evidence insufficient in quality/quantity; attacks victim’s credibility | Waived for failure to specify elements in Rule 1925(b); alternatively, evidence was sufficient and credibility challenge attacks weight (which was waived) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Diamond, 83 A.3d 119 (Pa. 2013) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Garland, 63 A.3d 339 (Pa. Super. 2013) (Rule 1925(b) must identify specific elements challenged to preserve sufficiency claim)
- Commonwealth v. Allshouse, 969 A.2d 1236 (Pa. Super. 2009) (appellant must clearly identify issues for meaningful review)
- Commonwealth v. Lopez, 57 A.3d 74 (Pa. Super. 2012) (distinguishing sufficiency challenges from weight-of-the-evidence challenges)
- Commonwealth v. Small, 741 A.2d 666 (Pa. 1999) (credibility/weight claims are not sufficiency challenges and must be preserved)