Com. v. Walker-Womack, M.
Com. v. Walker-Womack, M. No. 1809 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 3, 2017Background
- In February 2016 a jury convicted 15‑year‑old Marquise Walker‑Womack of first‑degree murder and related offenses for a 2009 shooting; he received 35 years to life. The first trial in 2014 ended in a hung jury.
- Eyewitnesses (Allen Bryant, Katora Wilson Bush, Gerald Bush, Amirajh Wilson) testified a skinny Black teenager in a black hoodie approached the victim from behind and shot him three times; some witnesses saw a person flee.
- Ballistics testing matched the three bullets recovered from the victim to a seized .38 Special recovered from an apartment tied to co‑defendant Warren Stokes and other gang members.
- Gang‑member witnesses Kareem Pittman and Tayale Shelton (who had pleaded guilty in separate RICO cases and sought 5K1.1 departures) testified Walker‑Womack shot the victim at Stokes’ behest; Pittman and Shelton described Walker‑Womack as a Greenway Gorillas member who sought to advance in the gang.
- Cellmate Thomas Adams previously gave a statement that Walker‑Womack confessed; at trial Adams recanted and said he fabricated the statement for favorable treatment.
- Walker‑Womack sought a new trial arguing the guilty verdict was against the weight of the evidence because (1) Pittman and Shelton had incentives to fabricate testimony, and (2) Adams’ recantation undermined the case; the trial court denied relief and the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Commonwealth's / Trial Court's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether verdict was against the weight of the evidence based on cooperating witnesses' incentives | Pittman and Shelton faced federal exposure and possible sentence reductions, creating motive to fabricate testimony implicating Walker‑Womack | Jury heard impeachment regarding cooperation agreements and still found their testimony corroborated by independent eyewitness and ballistics evidence | Denied; the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence |
| Whether recantation by cellmate Adams undermines verdict | Adams recanted his prior statement at trial, claiming fabrication, therefore his prior inculpatory statement is unreliable | Trial court: jury could credit the prior out‑of‑court statement or other corroborating evidence; Adams’ recantation did not negate the combined weight of evidence | Denied; Adams’ recantation did not render verdict against the weight of the evidence |
| Whether corroborating physical and eyewitness evidence sufficiently supports convictions | — (implicit) Appellant argues testimony is unreliable absent strong corroboration | Ballistics matched bullets to the seized .38; multiple eyewitnesses described perpetrator consistent with Walker‑Womack | Held supportive of jury verdict; corroboration defeats weight challenge |
| Whether trial court abused discretion in denying motion for new trial | Walker‑Womack contends the cumulative impeachment and recantation warranted a new trial | Trial court exercised discretion after reviewing credibility, impeachment, and corroboration; appellate review affords deference | Denied; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Widmer v. Commonwealth, 560 Pa. 308 (trial‑court discretion on weight claims; new trial standard)
- Brown v. Commonwealth, 538 Pa. 410 (weight‑of‑evidence standard—when new trial is appropriate)
- Farquharson v. Commonwealth, 467 Pa. 50 (deference to trial judge on weight determinations)
- Holley v. Commonwealth, 945 A.2d 241 (fact‑finder may credit Commonwealth witnesses over others)
- Coker v. S.M. Flickinger Co., 533 Pa. 441 (definition and limits of judicial discretion)
- Commonwealth v. Clay, 64 A.3d 1049 (review standards and limits for weight‑of‑evidence claims)