Com. v. Winbush, M.
1792 EDA 2016
Pa. Super. Ct.Feb 6, 2017Background
- Four-year-old J.D., cared for by her grandmother Mary Winbush since infancy, died after Winbush gave her an adult dose of oxycodone on May 6, 2014. Cause of death: overdose. Winbush had obtained oxycodone without a prescription.
- Winbush pled guilty to involuntary manslaughter and two counts of possession of a controlled substance on February 3, 2016; sentencing was deferred for a PSI.
- On April 12, 2016 the trial court imposed an aggregate mitigated-range county sentence of 6 to 23 months’ incarceration, followed by two years’ probation. The court cited Winbush’s acceptance of responsibility, community support, addiction history, and the need to balance punishment and rehabilitation.
- The Commonwealth filed a timely motion for reconsideration and then appealed the discretionary aspects of sentence, arguing the sentence was excessively lenient given the child’s death and Winbush’s positive opiate test at sentencing.
- The trial court denied reconsideration but added a condition requiring completion of a county drug and alcohol program prior to parole consideration.
- The Superior Court affirmed, finding the court had the PSI, expressly considered relevant factors, gave reasons on the record, and did not abuse its sentencing discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence was an abusive, unduly lenient discretionary sentence | Commonwealth: 6 months (county) is too lenient for involuntary manslaughter causing a child’s death; court failed to adequately justify downward deviation | Winbush: Trial court considered PSI, accepted responsibility, mitigating factors, and balanced punishment with rehabilitation | Affirmed: No abuse of discretion; court considered PSI and explained reasons for mitigated-range county sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 125 A.3d 822 (Pa. Super. 2015) (framework for when a sentencing claim raises a substantial question)
- Commonwealth v. Hoch, 936 A.2d 515 (Pa. Super. 2007) (Commonwealth may raise sentencing claim; leniency without adequate reasons can present substantial question)
- Commonwealth v. Ventura, 975 A.2d 1128 (Pa. Super. 2009) (PSI generally suffices to show the court was aware of and weighed relevant mitigation; court must place reasons on the record)