Commonwealth v. Johnson, W., Aplt
139 A.3d 1257
| Pa. | 2016Background
- Johnson, a capital defendant, appeals post-conviction relief denial and requests an evidentiary hearing on a single ineffectiveness claim involving alibi witnesses.
- Trial evidence showed Johnson and co-defendants ambushed and shot the victim after prior confrontations over a groping incident; eyewitness identifications and lineup procedures formed the core guilt evidence.
- A live-lineup was canceled; pretrial lineup participation and identify-related issues became focal points at trial and on PCRA review.
- PCRA court conducted limited testimony; the court later vacated the death sentence based on a defense stipulation that trial counsel was ineffective in the penalty phase and scheduled a new penalty hearing.
- On remand, the court remitted various claims, and Johnson pursued fourteen amended PCRA claims; the case returns for an evidentiary hearing on the alibi witnesses while other claims were resolved on the merits.
- This opinion grants an evidentiary hearing solely on the alibi witnesses Handy and White; other claimed errors are denied or deemed waived.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failing to present alibi witnesses | Handy and White alibi testimony would negate guilt | Counsel lacked a reasonable basis; prejudice shown | Evidentiary hearing on alibi issue warranted |
| Failure to explain lineup refusal | Tattoo evidence could rebut consciousness-of-guilt inference | No evidentiary support or prejudice shown | No evidentiary hearing required; no prejudice established |
| Kloiber instruction adequacy | Trial judge should have objected; instruction flawed | Instruction largely tracked law; no prejudice shown | No merit; no hearing warranted |
| Batson claim of racial discrimination | Prosecutor discriminated against African-American venirepersons; counsel ineffective for not objecting | No prima facie showing of discrimination; reasons for strikes credible | Batson claim meritless; no hearing warranted |
| Prosecutorial misconduct and appellate relief | Closing remarks tainted jury; counsel should have urged relief on appeal | Closing arguments within prosecutorial latitude; no prejudice shown | Claims fail; no evidentiary hearing on misconduct |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1967) (lineup procedures; right to counsel and initial identification procedures)
- Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1977) (totality-of-circumstances reliability of pretrial identifications)
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (U.S. 1986) (prosecutorial race-based peremptory challenges; burden-shifting framework)
- Kloiber v. Commonwealth, 378 Pa. 412, 106 A.2d 820 (Pa. 1954) (identification testimony; requirement to warn jury to receive with caution under certain conditions)
- Uderra, Commonwealth v. Uderra, 580 Pa. 492, 862 A.2d 74 (Pa. 2004) (Batson analysis when no timely objection; burden allocation)