Commonwealth v. Feliciano
67 A.3d 19
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Detective Mayer, undercover, arranged a cocaine purchase from Feliciano on Locust Street, Reading, PA.
- Two undercover transactions occurred: Jan. 18, 2010 (five bags cocaine for $40) and Jan. 21, 2010 (five bags cocaine for $40).
- Jane Doe, an unnamed female, interacted with Mayer and later informed him, “He’s bagging it up. He will be out.”
- Feliciano was convicted at trial of two counts of PWID, two counts of cocaine possession, two counts of conspiracy to PWID, and one conspiracy count; sentenced to 7 years 3 months to 14 years 6 months.
- Appeals challenged: (A) sufficiency of conspiracy evidence, (B) admissibility of co-conspirator hearsay, (C) chain-of-custody for cocaine envelopes.
- Court affirmed the judgment, rejecting each challenge and upholding the conspiracy finding and evidentiary rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of conspiracy evidence | Feliciano lacked an agreement and shared criminal intent with the unknown female. | Anderson and Mills require proof of joint agreement; no shared intent shown. | Sufficiency established; reasonable jury could infer conspiracy. |
| Admissibility of co-conspirator hearsay | Statement showed conspiracy and should be admitted. | No proven conspiracy; statement was improperly admitted. | Error not shown; statement admitted as co-conspirator exception with minimal proof. |
| Chain of custody of cocaine envelopes | Cocaine envelopes lacked continuous custody. | Gaps render it inadmissible. | Chain of custody sufficient; integrity inferred; admissible and weight for jury. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Stokes, 38 A.3d 846 (Pa. Super. 2011) (sufficiency standard and circumstantial evidence review)
- Commonwealth v. Devine, 26 A.3d 1139 (Pa. Super. 2011) (conspiracy elements and overt acts)
- Commonwealth v. Byrd, 417 A.2d 173 (Pa. 1980) (acquittal of co-conspirator does not bar others)
- Commonwealth v. Campbell, 651 A.2d 1096 (Pa. 1994) (conspiracy proof and circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Basile, 458 A.2d 587 (Pa. Super. 1983) (co-conspirator hearsay foundations)
- Commonwealth v. Kersten, 482 A.2d 600 (Pa. Super. 1984) (order of proof for co-conspirator statements)
- Commonwealth v. Greene, 702 A.2d 547 (Pa. Super. 1997) (conspiracy existence shown by relation and conduct)
- Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 332 A.2d 490 (Pa. Super. 1974) (witnesses need not all testify for chain of custody)
- Commonwealth v. Pedano, 405 A.2d 525 (Pa. Super. 1979) (chain-of-custody gaps; necessity of foundation)
- Commonwealth v. Martin, 419 A.2d 795 (Pa. Super. 1980) (exhibits' identity preserved despite gaps)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 838 A.2d 663 (Pa. 2003) (co-conspirator statement admissibility standards)
- Commonwealth v. Lambert, 795 A.2d 1010 (Pa. Super. 2002) (four-factor conspiracy framework)
- Commonwealth v. Mills, 478 A.2d 30 (Pa. Super. 1984) (insufficient evidence of conspiracy despite showing steps toward crime)
- Commonwealth v. Anderson, 402 A.2d 546 (Pa. Super. 1979) (need for joint intent in conspiracy analysis)