Commonwealth v. Andrews
158 A.3d 1260
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2017Background
- On May 29, 2008 Terrence Patrick Andrews fatally stabbed neighbor Lisa Maas; he told police "I did it" and admitted the stabbing. He was charged with first‑degree murder and burglary.
- At trial Andrews pursued a diminished‑capacity defense (expert testimony from Dr. Barbara Ziv) rather than an insanity defense; the jury convicted him of first‑degree murder and burglary and he was sentenced to life plus 5–10 years.
- Andrews filed a timely PCRA petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to advise him to plead "guilty but mentally ill" (GBMI), arguing a GBMI plea would have secured psychiatric treatment while serving his sentence.
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition, reasoning Andrews was not entitled to plead GBMI because he had not asserted an insanity defense; the Commonwealth made the same argument relying on 18 Pa.C.S. § 314(a).
- The Superior Court reversed the dismissal, holding a defendant need not assert an insanity defense before pleading GBMI under § 314(b), and remanded for full PCRA consideration of the ineffective‑assistance claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise pleading "guilty but mentally ill" | Andrews: counsel should have advised a GBMI plea; he would have received psychiatric treatment and might have had a different outcome | Commonwealth: GBMI is only available where defendant asserted an insanity defense under § 314(a); Andrews did not assert insanity, so claim lacks merit | Superior Court: GBMI plea under § 314(b) does not require asserting an insanity defense; PCRA dismissal was erroneous and claim must be adjudicated on its merits on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Townsend v. Commonwealth, 747 A.2d 376 (Pa. Super. 2000) (addressing counsel's decision and client refusal regarding GBMI plea)
- Natividad v. Commonwealth, 938 A.2d 310 (Pa. 2007) (standards for proving ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Jones v. Commonwealth, 929 A.2d 205 (Pa. 2007) (effect of a guilty plea and waiver of defenses)
- Spotz v. Commonwealth, 47 A.3d 63 (Pa. 2012) (meritless claims and pleading requirements)
- Hatfield v. Commonwealth, 579 A.2d 945 (Pa. Super. 1990) (discussion of insanity defense relevance to guilt and GBMI)
- Andre v. Commonwealth, 17 A.3d 951 (Pa. Super. 2011) (analysis of interplay among mens rea, insanity, and GBMI)