Com. v. Williams, J.
Com. v. Williams, J. No. 534 WDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Mar 14, 2017Background
- On Nov. 21–22, 2014 a shooting occurred near the Red Tomato Lounge in Erie; shell casings and a semiautomatic Beretta (with magazine) and related ammunition were recovered at the scene.
- Eyewitnesses (Shadarea Flemings and John Leggiero) identified Jameele Williams as the shooter, described a chrome handgun approximately ten inches long, and reported Williams pulling the gun from his pocket and firing while chasing the victim, Derrick Hemphill.
- Police obtained video showing Williams and a co-defendant taking an object from a car and running; forensics linked most casings to a single handgun type consistent with a compact pistol.
- Williams was tried twice: acquitted of homicide and aggravated assaults at first trial; retried and convicted of firearms not to be carried without a license (F3), possession of an instrument of crime (M1), and reckless endangerment (M2).
- Williams was sentenced to an aggregate 87 to 186 months’ imprisonment (aggravated range); he appealed challenging (1) sufficiency of evidence for the firearms charge (arguing lack of proof of barrel/overall length), (2) weight of the evidence (whether he fired the gun), and (3) discretionary aspects of sentence.
- The Superior Court affirmed, adopting the trial court opinion that the evidence supported the firearm-size inference, the weight claim was unpreserved, and the sentencing court adequately explained its aggravated-range sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Commonwealth's Argument | Williams's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for firearms charge (definition requires barrel/overall length) | Circumstantial and direct evidence (eyewitness descriptions of a ~10" chrome handgun, witness seeing gun pulled from pocket, ballistics linking casings to handguns) supported a reasonable inference the weapon met statutory firearm dimensions. | Commonwealth failed to prove barrel or overall length; no witness measured the gun, so statutory definition of "firearm" not established. | Affirmed: jury could infer the weapon was a handgun within statutory dimensions from testimony and ballistics. |
| Weight of the evidence (whether Williams actually fired the gun) | Jury credibility determinations supported convictions; weight claim was not preserved below. | Verdict was against the weight of the evidence; evidence did not conclusively prove Williams fired the shots. | Dismissed: claim waived for failure to timely raise under Pa.R.Crim.P. 607; trial court’s exercise of discretion not shown to be palpably abused. |
| Discretionary aspects of sentence (aggravated-range, consideration of mitigation) | Sentencing court considered pre-sentence report, revocation, offender history (multiple gun convictions, offense while on supervision), community impact, and stated reasons on record. | Sentence was manifestly excessive, failed to account for rehabilitative potential and mitigating factors. | Affirmed: record supports the aggravated-range sentence and court explained reasons; no abuse of discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Roberts, 133 A.3d 759 (Pa. Super. 2016) (standard for sufficiency review and appellate deference to the factfinder)
- Commonwealth v. Ramtahal, 33 A.3d 602 (Pa. 2011) (standard of review for weight-of-the-evidence claims and trial court discretion)
- Commonwealth v. Flowers, 149 A.3d 867 (Pa. Super. 2016) (requirements for appellate review of discretionary aspects of sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Walls, 926 A.2d 957 (Pa. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)
- Commonwealth v. Patterson, 91 A.3d 55 (Pa. 2014) (sufficiency review: view evidence in light most favorable to the Commonwealth)