Commonwealth v. Boyd
73 A.3d 1269
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Boyd was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault with serious bodily injury, attempted aggravated assault, two REAP counts, two simple assaults, and carrying a firearm without a license.
- On June 24, 2010, the sentencing court imposed an aggregate sentence of not less than 8.5 years to not more than 20 years, plus fines, costs, and restitution.
- Boyd argued that the fines imposed violated 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 9726(c), which requires a record showing the defendant’s ability to pay.
- Boyd did not raise the issue at sentencing, in a post-sentence motion, or in his appeal pleadings.
- The issue involves whether the failure to preserve an ability-to-pay claim bars appellate review, given that the claim concerns the legality of the sentence.
- The court held that only an issue showing there was no evidence of the defendant’s ability to pay is non-waivable; other ability-to-pay claims are waivable if not preserved.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preservation of ability-to-pay claims under §9726(c). | Boyd maintains lack of record evidence violates statute; claim is illegal-sentence issue. | Waiver applies unless no record evidence; not preservationally barred if there is evidence. | Non-waivable when no evidentiary basis; otherwise waivable. |
| Whether the weight-of-the-evidence claim warrants relief. | Evidence at trial was insufficient to convict beyond reasonable doubt. | Trial evidence supported the verdict; no abuse of discretion. | Weight claim meritless; verdict supported by record. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 67 A.3d 817 (Pa.Super.2013) (illegal-sentence framework; non-waivable claims in certain contexts)
- Commonwealth v. Foster, 609 Pa. 502 (Pa.2011) (lead opinion on legality of sentence; concurrence opinions debated waiver rule)
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 931 A.2d 15 (Pa.Super.2007) (en banc; legality of sentences influencing waiver analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Jacobs, 900 A.2d 368 (Pa.Super.2006) (en banc; illegal sentence considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 900 A.2d 906 (Pa.Super.2006) (en banc; legality vs. discretionary sentencing considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Archer, 722 A.2d 203 (Pa.Super.1998) (en banc; legality approach to sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Cruz, 919 A.2d 279 (Pa.Super.2007) (weight-of-evidence standard and appellate review)