Commonwealth v. Jones
166 A.3d 349
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2017Background
- Appellant Riccario J. Jones was arrested after a November 5, 2014 shooting in Erie and charged with multiple offenses including Aggravated Assault and Attempted Murder; a jury convicted him of several lesser charges including Recklessly Endangering Another Person (REAP) but deadlocked on Aggravated Assault and Attempted Murder.
- The trial court recorded guilty verdicts on REAP and other counts and entered a hung jury on the two greater offenses.
- On April 18, 2016, Jones filed a Pa.R.Crim.P. 648 motion to dismiss, arguing the REAP conviction (a lesser‑included offense) operated as an acquittal of the greater offenses and thus barred retrial under double jeopardy and 18 Pa.C.S. § 109(1).
- The trial court denied the motion on May 3, 2016; the court certified the order for immediate appellate review and this Court granted permission to appeal.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether the REAP conviction was a legal acquittal of Aggravated Assault and Attempted Murder such that retrial was barred, and affirmed the trial court’s denial of dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether double jeopardy/Pa.R.Crim.P. 648 bars retrial on hung counts when jury convicted on a lesser included offense | Jones: REAP conviction constitutes an acquittal of the greater offenses, so retrial is barred under Pa. Const. art. I, § 10 and § 109(1) | Commonwealth: Retrial permitted because Rule 648 and double jeopardy do not bar reprosecution where a guilty verdict on another count is not an acquittal of the greater offense | Court: Affirmed — REAP is not an acquittal of Aggravated Assault or Attempted Murder; retrial is allowed |
Key Cases Cited
- Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania, 537 U.S. 101 (2003) (retrials after a hung jury do not automatically violate double jeopardy)
- Commonwealth v. Harris, 582 A.2d 1319 (Pa. Super. 1990) (retrial on counts with no jury agreement is permitted unless other verdicts must be read as acquittals of those counts)
- Commonwealth v. Thatcher, 71 A.2d 796 (Pa. 1950) (acquittal of a constituent offense can bar prosecution for the greater offense)
- Commonwealth v. Mattis, 686 A.2d 408 (Pa. Super. 1996) (de novo review applies to questions of law)