Commonwealth v. Hill, 66 A.3d 359

Background

Appellant Kalee Hill was sentenced on October 26, 2011 to 35–70 years in prison for three counts of aggravated assault and one firearms count, plus a consecutive 4–8 year term for a probation violation (VOP) after an open guilty plea (June 12, 2011).
The sentencing court imposed 10–20 year terms for each aggravated assault count and 5–10 years for the firearms count, with a separate VOP term of 4–8 years to be served consecutively.
The shooting occurred at a busy Philadelphia intersection; a stray bullet injured Raymond Erwin and a nine-month-pregnant Ms. Hein; the Commonwealth acknowledged the shootings were unintentional but did not mitigate liability.
Appellant filed a Motion for Reconsideration on November 3, 2011; a timely notice of appeal followed.
On appeal, Hill challenges (1) the legality of a Gagnon hearing and sentence imposed for the VOP given probation termination dates, and (2) the trial court’s handling of sentencing without a full mental health evaluation and adequate reasons for omitting such evaluation.
The Superior Court vacated the judgment of sentence and remanded for resentencing to clarify whether Hill was on probation at the time of the 10/26/2011 sentencing.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court had authority to conduct a Gagnon hearing after probation termination	Hill asserts no standing for a Gagnon hearing since probation was terminated previously.	Commonwealth contends the claim implicates the legality of the sentence and is waived or reviewable only if properly raised.	Remand to clarify probation status; if on probation, conduct proper Gagnon hearing and resentence.
Whether the VOP sentence was illegal due to unclear probation status in the record	Ambiguity in the record suggests improper imposition of 4–8 year VOP term.	Written order controls; ambiguities may be clerical or docketing errors; waiver applies.	Remand to determine probation status; if on probation, correct sentencing accordingly.
Whether the discretionary aspects of sentence were properly reviewable given the record	Mental health evaluation and sentencing factors were not adequately considered; preserved via Rule 2119(f).	Appellant failed to provide a proper Rule 2119(f) statement; the issue is waived or not properly presented.	Discretionary challenge deemed waived/insufficiently framed; but remand retained for potential reconsideration if probation issue requires re-sentencing.
Whether the mental health evaluation before sentencing was adequate	Appellant contends incomplete evaluation affected sentencing considerations.	Court adequately considered mental health information already in record and PSI.	If a full psychiatric evaluation is prepared on remand, it must be considered at resentencing.

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Arest, 734 A.2d 910 (Pa. Super. 1999) (sentence legality governs whether a sentence must be vacated)
Commonwealth v. Robinson, 931 A.2d 21 (Pa. Super. 2007) (legality of sentence; lack of statutory authorization triggers vacatur)
Commonwealth v. Pinko, 811 A.2d 576 (Pa. Super. 2002) (legality of sentence involves court authority to impose sentence)
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 11 A.3d 519 (Pa. Super. 2010) (challenge to legality of sentence when authority is in doubt)
Commonwealth v. Catt, 994 A.2d 1158 (Pa. Super. 2010) (legal challenge to sentence authority; appellate review of legality)
Commonwealth v. Heilman, 876 A.2d 1021 (Pa. Super. 2005) (scope of review for probation violation sentencing orders)
Commonwealth v. Ritchey, 779 A.2d 1183 (Pa. Super. 2001) (discretionary sentencing review; need for timely Rule 2119(f) statement)
Commonwealth v. Kelly, 33 A.3d 638 (Pa. Super. 2011) (consideration of requisite factors and pre-sentence reports in sentencing)
Commonwealth v. Borrin, 12 A.3d 466 (Pa. Super. 2011) (clerical error/clarification of judgment; en banc discussion)
Commonwealth v. Borrin, 22 A.3d 1020 (Pa. 2011) (Supreme Court decision related to clerical/clarification issue)
Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (probation/parole revocation procedures; due process)