Com. v. Williams, M.
Com. v. Williams, M. No. 1259 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jun 22, 2017Background
- On Feb. 15, 2014, Michael Williams entered the Liberty Bar in Lebanon, PA, approached Patrick Embry, and stabbed him multiple times; surveillance video and eyewitness Lori Smith captured the assault. Embry suffered 13 stab wounds and was hospitalized. Williams was arrested with knives on his person.
- Williams was tried by jury (Aug. 6, 2014); acquitted of attempted homicide but convicted of aggravated assault and related counts; sentenced to 11.5–23 years (Oct. 29, 2014).
- Williams filed a pro se PCRA petition; counsel was appointed and an amended PCRA petition was litigated; an evidentiary hearing was held June 20, 2016.
- PCRA court (Judge Charles) denied relief (June 28, 2016); Superior Court affirmed, adopting the trial court’s thorough opinion addressing each claim.
- Core disputed issues: multiple alleged instances of unobjected-to leading or hearsay questions; failure to call witnesses (including girlfriend Melissa Eiler); alleged failure to exploit an inconsistency between Lori Smith’s testimony and the surveillance video; a claimed (but nonexistent) toxicology report; challenge to prior North Carolina convictions in sentencing score; and alleged prosecutorial misconduct about disclosure of knife location.
Issues
| Issue | Williams' Argument | Commonwealth / Trial Court Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Failure to object to leading questions / hearsay | Trial counsel should have objected to seven instances of leading questions and hearsay to prevent prejudice | Many questioned passages were preliminary, non-prejudicial, admissible (state-of-mind, excited utterance, foundation could be supplied), or cumulative to live witness testimony/video; objections likely would be overruled or cured | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice shown; PCRA denied |
| 2) Failure to call witnesses (Eiler, Pinson, Justiano, Latoya) | Counsel ignored a list of witnesses and refused to call girlfriend Eiler despite Williams’ request | Counsel investigated availability; three witnesses were not shown to be available; counsel strategically declined to call Eiler because her testimony about Embry’s advances would support Commonwealth’s motive theory and her threats occurred after the stabbing | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice; PCRA denied |
| 3) Failure to cross-examine Lori Smith about inconsistencies with video | Counsel should have impeached Smith because her testimony allegedly contradicted the surveillance footage | Court and record show no material inconsistency between Smith’s testimony and the video; allegation of videotape alteration lacked any credible proof | No ineffective assistance; claim denied |
| 4) Failure to introduce victim’s toxicology report | Counsel failed to use toxicology showing victim’s drug use to support self-defense | No such toxicology report exists; counsel had already emphasized Embry’s intoxication at closing | No ineffective assistance; claim denied |
| 5) Sentencing: challenge to inclusion of four North Carolina felonies | Williams argued his prior-record sheet included felony convictions he did not commit, so score was inflated | Prior-record was verified by name, DOB, SSN and fingerprints (county official testified); counsel investigated and reasonably relied on verification; even if errors existed, court would have imposed same sentence | No ineffective assistance; no prejudice; claim denied |
| 6) Prosecutorial misconduct — disclosing knife location to victim | Williams claimed prosecutor told victim where the knife was (so victim could testify knife hung in Williams’s house) | Transcript contains no testimony placing the knife on a wall in Williams’s home; no evidence of prosecutor planting testimony; claim appears speculative and unsupported | No misconduct shown; claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795 (Pa. 2014) (standard of review for PCRA denials)
- Commonwealth v. Wilson, 824 A.2d 331 (Pa. Super. 2003) (deference to PCRA court findings)
- Commonwealth v. Spotz, 84 A.3d 294 (Pa. 2014) (scope of review limited to PCRA record)
- Commonwealth v. White, 734 A.2d 374 (Pa. 1999) (credibility findings by PCRA court binding if supported)
- Commonwealth v. Fulton, 830 A.2d 567 (Pa. 2003) (three-prong ineffective assistance test)
- Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121 (Pa. 2012) (no ineffectiveness for failing to raise meritless claim)
- Commonwealth v. Daniels, 963 A.2d 409 (Pa. 2009) (defendant must prove each prong of ineffectiveness)
- Commonwealth v. Cox, 728 A.2d 923 (Pa. 1999) (hearsay-objection ineffectiveness claims require context; vacuum claims insufficient)
- Commonwealth v. Polston, 616 A.2d 669 (Pa. Super. 1992) (prejudice requirement for omitted objections)
- Commonwealth v. Bell, 476 A.2d 439 (Pa. Super. 1984) (trial court discretion on admissibility and leading questions)
- Commonwealth v. Sam, 635 A.2d 603 (Pa. 1993) (no duty to object where hearsay exception applies)
- Commonwealth v. Seltzer, 437 A.2d 988 (Pa. Super. 1981) (cumulative hearsay can prejudice if it proves entire case)
- Commonwealth v. DiNicola, 751 A.2d 197 (Pa. Super. 2000) (evaluate whether underlying claim has arguable merit)
- Commonwealth v. Spatz, 896 A.2d 1191 (Pa. 2006) (strategic choices by counsel are given deference)