Com. v. Zeigler, R.
Com. v. Zeigler, R. No. 2198 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 28, 2017Background
- Appellant Ryan S. Zeigler was convicted after a July 30, 2015 bench trial of two counts each of aggravated assault, possession of an instrument of crime, simple assault, and recklessly endangering another person.
- Sentenced on June 1, 2016 to an aggregate term of 2½ to 5 years imprisonment followed by five years probation.
- Appellant did not raise a weight-of-the-evidence claim orally on the record, in a written pre-sentence motion, or in a post-sentence motion before sentencing.
- Appellant filed a timely appeal and Rule 1925(b) statement but sought review of the weight claim for the first time on appeal.
- The trial court held the weight claim waived for failure to preserve it; the Superior Court affirmed, declining to review the merits because the trial court never had an opportunity to exercise discretion on the weight claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence | Zeigler: verdicts "shock the conscience"; evidence was insufficiently reliable to support convictions | Commonwealth: weight claim was not preserved below and therefore waived | Waived for failure to raise weight claim before sentencing or in post-sentence motion; appellate court declined to review merits |
| Whether convictions "shock the conscience" (restatement of weight claim) | Zeigler: convictions so contrary to evidence they require new trial | Commonwealth: same preservation/waiver defense | Same—treated as a weight claim and waived |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Zeigler raised sufficiency in statement of issues | Commonwealth: disputed on the merits | Waived by appellant in briefing (no argument presented); not considered |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Ross, 856 A.2d 93 (Pa. Super. 2004) (describes standard for awarding a new trial when verdict shocks conscience)
- Commonwealth v. Sherwood, 982 A.2d 483 (Pa. 2009) (failure to raise weight claim properly results in waiver)
- Commonwealth v. Thompson, 93 A.3d 478 (Pa. Super. 2014) (appellate court cannot review weight claim when trial court never exercised discretion)
- Commonwealth v. Champney, 832 A.2d 403 (Pa. Super. 2003) (weight-of-the-evidence standard is abuse of discretion)