Commonwealth v. Guess
53 A.3d 895
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2012Background
- Guess was charged with burglary, conspiracy, attempted burglary, possession of an instrument of crime, criminal trespass, identity theft, theft by unlawful taking, and receiving stolen property related to two adjacent apartment buildings in Lansdale, PA.
- Police identified Guess and a co-conspirator as suspects fitting a victim's description of two Black males at the Wissahickon Apartments during a burglary in progress.
- Detective DiBonaventura encountered Guess and Jordan, conducted a pat-down, and recovered jewelry and hotel placards; Guess was arrested.
- At trial, Guess was found guilty on all counts except identity theft, which was dismissed; he received a 25–50 year sentence under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9714(a)(2).
- Guess filed a PCRA petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel on three grounds; the PCRA court denied relief, and Guess appealed.
- On appeal, the Superior Court analyzed whether trial counsel’s failures to object to suppression, jewelry evidence, and pre-arrest silence affected the outcome.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression motion for pre-arrest detention | Guess argues Det. DiBonaventura detained him unlawfully. | Commonwealth contends the initial approach was a mere encounter evolving to detention with reasonable suspicion for safety. | Detention supported by reasonable suspicion; no relief |
| Admission of jewelry evidence | Jewelry was irrelevant and prejudicial; ownership not established. | Counsel strategically chose to challenge sufficiency by highlighting lack of ownership. | No ineffective assistance; strategic basis shown |
| Use of pre-arrest silence at trial | Prosecution improperly used Guess's pre-arrest silence to imply guilt. | Reference to silence on direct may have narrow purpose; closing was strategic. | Pre-arrest silence used improperly in closing; prejudice not proven |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Grant, 992 A.2d 152 (Pa. Super. 2010) (standard for reviewing PCRA orders)
- Commonwealth v. Coleman, 19 A.3d 1111 (Pa. Super. 2011) (distinguishing mere encounter from detention)
- Commonwealth v. Key, 789 A.2d 282 (Pa. Super. 2001) (set framework for seizure analysis)
- Commonwealth v. McClease, 750 A.2d 320 (Pa. Super. 2000) (relevance of demeanor in reasonable suspicion)
- Commonwealth v. Guzman, 44 A.3d 688 (Pa. Super. 2012) (Terry stop reasonable suspicion standard in Pa.)
- Commonwealth v. Molina, 33 A.3d 51 (Pa. Super. 2011) (pre-arrest silence not automatically prejudicial)
- Commonwealth v. Adams, 39 A.3d 310 (Pa. Super. 2012) (closing arguments on silence evaluated)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (reasonable suspicion for stop and frisk)
- Molina, 33 A.3d 51 (Pa. Super. 2011) (en banc discussion on pre-arrest silence)