Commonwealth v. Hale
85 A.3d 570
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- Hale convicted after a home invasion where a handgun was pointed at a pregnant victim and her child; two accomplices, including Bassett, involved in stealing a television.
- Police recovered the television near the victim’s residence and later recovered a handgun from a vehicle Hale occupied.
- Victim identified Hale at trial; suppression motion seeking to suppress on identification grounds denied.
- Jury could not reach verdict on several counts; mistrial declared as to robbery, burglary, conspiracy.
- Hale was sentenced in two stages in 2011 and 2012, challenging the grading of the firearms offense; the court vacated and remanded for resentencing.
- Appellant pursued a timely appeal, challenging suppression, juror-for-cause, and grading/sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of identification admissibility | Hale | Hale argues the on-scene ID was unduly suggestive | No; identification upheld based on totality of circumstances |
| Challenge for cause for juror 39 (law enforcement background) | Hale | Juror could be impartial despite police background | No; no real relationship; no abuse of discretion in not striking for cause |
| Grading of persons not to possess firearms (juvenile adjudication vs conviction) | Commonwealth | Juvenile adjudication should be treated as conviction for grading | Judgment of sentence vacated; juvenile adjudication cannot trigger second-degree felony grading; must be misdemeanor of first degree |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wade, 33 A.3d 108 (Pa. Super. 2011) (suppression review and identification factors)
- Commonwealth v. Armstrong, 74 A.3d 228 (Pa. Super. 2013) (on-scene identifications not inherently unduly suggestive)
- Commonwealth v. Colon, 299 A.2d 326 (Pa. Super. 1972) (challenge for cause when juror has close relationship with parties)
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 383 A.2d 874 (Pa. 1979) (police officer juror disqualification—plurality view on real relationship)
- Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 369 A.2d 307 (Pa. Super. 1976) (example where officer juror was disqualified for cause)
- Commonwealth v. Lee, 585 A.2d 1084 (Pa. Super. 1991) (retired officer not automatically disqualified; abuse of discretion standard)
- Commonwealth v. Baker, 614 A.2d 663 (Pa. 1992) (juvenile adjudications admissible in death-penalty aggravator context; legislative response)
- Commonwealth v. Thomas, 743 A.2d 460 (Pa. Super. 1999) (distinguishes Baker regarding use of juvenile adjudications for sentencing)