Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Perez, C., 249 A.3d 1092

Aug. 20, 2016: a patron (victim) was fatally stabbed in the neck at the Bleu Martini in Philadelphia; eyewitnesses saw bleeding seconds after a confrontation.
Witness Hector Martinez saw appellee (Perez) near the victim with blood on his gray shirt but did not see the stabbing; DNA testing later showed the blood on Perez’s shirt matched the victim and excluded Perez as the source.
Bouncer Marquis McNair testified Perez and the victim had two confrontations; during the second Perez made an arm motion toward the victim’s neck and, within seconds after separation, a bystander cried “they cut him.”
Perez discarded a bloody shirt in a trash bin, later retrieved it at McNair’s direction, and initially denied involvement when questioned by police; officers found the bloody shirt tucked behind his booth seat.
Two preliminary hearing judges dismissed the charges; the Superior Court en banc affirmed the dismissal; the Commonwealth appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Perez's Argument	Held
Whether the Superior Court misapplied the prima facie sufficiency standard at the preliminary hearing	Superior Court failed to view evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth and elevated the burden beyond prima facie/probable cause	Superior Court properly required reasonable, more-probable-than-not inferences and found the evidence insufficient	Court held Superior Court misapplied the standard; reversed and remanded to hold Perez for trial
Whether the presented evidence (altercations, arm motion, blood on shirt, concealment, statements) established probable cause that Perez was the perpetrator	The totality of facts and reasonable inferences (timing, arm motion, victim’s blood on Perez’s shirt, concealment/false statements) establish probable cause	No eyewitness saw the stabbing or a weapon; blood could have hit others in the crowded club; Perez cooperated, so inferences of guilt are speculative	Court held that, when read in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth and giving effect to reasonable inferences, the evidence supported a prima facie case and ordered Perez held for trial

Commonwealth v. Karetny, 880 A.2d 505 (Pa. 2005) (prima facie exists when evidence, if accepted, would warrant a jury determination and establishes probable cause)
Commonwealth v. Huggins, 836 A.2d 862 (Pa. 2003) (preliminary-hearing evidence must be read in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth; reasonable inferences that support guilt are given effect)
Commonwealth v. McBride, 595 A.2d 589 (Pa. 1991) (purpose of preliminary hearing is to protect against unlawful detention; Commonwealth must show probable cause that accused probably committed the offense)
Commonwealth v. Wojdak, 466 A.2d 991 (Pa. 1983) (use of inferences at preliminary stage must meet a more-likely-than-not test; less is mere suspicion)
Commonwealth v. Prado, 393 A.2d 8 (Pa. 1978) (limits on drawing pretrial inferences of identity absent supporting evidence)