Com. v. Whitaker, D.
1664 EDA 2020
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Apr 12, 2022Background
- Whitaker was charged after a May 19, 2018 incident; tried November 6–8, 2019 on counts including strangulation, simple assault, possession of an instrument of crime (PIC), institutional vandalism, rape and sexual assault. Jury convicted on four misdemeanors (strangulation, simple assault, PIC, institutional vandalism) and acquitted on rape and sexual assault.
- Victim (Ms. Gray) testified Whitaker put a pillowcase around her throat, pressed a pillow against her face, held her down, removed her jeans and penetrated her vaginally; later he held a knife to her throat. Her son witnessed the pillowcase around her neck and called 911.
- Officers recovered the knife and pillow/pillowcase; arresting officers observed Whitaker masturbating on closed-circuit video in custody and later saw urine and a broken cot frame in his cell.
- Whitaker sentenced to an aggregate 44–132 months. Post-sentence motions and supplemental motions were delayed during the COVID Judicial Emergency; the Superior Court treated the late trial-court action as a breakdown in court operation and reached the merits.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief asserting the appeal is frivolous; Whitaker filed pro se responses. The Superior Court conducted an independent review of sufficiency-of-evidence claims and granted counsel’s withdrawal while affirming the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument (Whitaker) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Strangulation (18 Pa.C.S. §2718) | Commonwealth: testimony (victim and son) showed pillowcase applied to throat, impeding breathing — elements proven | Whitaker: acquittal on sexual-assault counts shows strangulation not proven | Court: Affirmed — sexual assault is relevant only to grading, not an element; evidence supported strangulation conviction |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Simple Assault (18 Pa.C.S. §2701(a)(3)) | Commonwealth: pillow, physical restraint, and knife created fear of imminent serious bodily injury | Whitaker: victim not in fear; preliminary testimony indicated she wouldn’t have called police | Court: Affirmed — physical menace (knife, restraint, pillow) supported conviction; credibility for jury to resolve |
| Sufficiency of evidence for PIC (18 Pa.C.S. §907) | Commonwealth: witness identifications and recovery of knife at scene showed possession with criminal intent | Whitaker: lack of DNA/fingerprints from knife/pillow undermines proof | Court: Affirmed — forensic identification not required; possession and intent proven by testimony and recovery of knife |
| Sufficiency of evidence for Institutional Vandalism (18 Pa.C.S. §3307) | Commonwealth: officer testimony that cot frame was broken after Whitaker was in solitary and that no one else had been in cellblock supported vandalism | Whitaker: argued best-evidence rule for CCTV, hearsay/conflicting testimony, and lack of video/photo proving damage | Court: Affirmed — best-evidence rule not implicated (video contents not used to prove vandalism); eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence sufficient; alleged testimonial conflicts waived/for jury credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural standard for counsel seeking to withdraw on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (requirements for Anders/Santiago submissions and appellate review)
- Commonwealth v. Gause, 164 A.3d 532 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Khalil, 806 A.2d 415 (Pa. Super. 2002) (court may treat untimely post-sentence action as court breakdown and reach merits)
- Commonwealth v. Green, 162 A.3d 509 (Pa. Super. 2017) (application of the best-evidence rule to recordings and when originals are required)