Commonwealth v. Jordan
619 Pa. 513
| Pa. | 2013Background
- Appellant Lewis M. Jordan pled guilty to murder generally and was tried for degree; jurors found first-degree murder and sentenced him to death.
- Over six weeks in fall 2007, Appellant committed six armed robberies of Philadelphia retail shops, including multiple Dunkin’ Donuts and pizza shops.
- During the October 31, 2007 Dunkin’ Donuts robbery, Officer Charles Cassidy, in uniform, confronted Appellant; Appellant shot Cassidy in the forehead and fled, later seizing the officer’s revolver.
- Evidence at trial included eyewitness identifications, DNA on the weapons, and a surveillance videotape of the robbery and shooting.
- During a two-day penalty phase, the jury found three aggravating factors and one mitigating factor, and sentenced Appellant to death.
- Appellant appeals on four issues: admissibility of prior-robbery evidence, admissibility and use of the slow-motion videotape, admissibility of life-in-being/victim-impact testimony in guilt, and alleged prosecutorial misconduct regarding remorse.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of prior robberies evidence | Prior robberies are relevant to intent and lack of accident/mistake | Evidence inflames jury and is more prejudicial than probative | Trial court did not abuse discretion; evidence admissible under Rule 404(b) |
| Slow-motion videotape admissibility | Slow-motion clarified sequence and negated panicked reaction | Video distorts time and inflates premeditation | No abuse; slow-motion admissible to aid juror understanding of sequence |
| Victim life-in-being vs. victim-impact at guilt phase | Testimony described victim’s life and impact to establish life-in-being | Testimony improperly functioned as victim-impact evidence in guilt phase | Error harmless; life-in-being proper but portions of testimony were victim-impact; overall harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Prosecutorial misconduct re remorse comments | Remorse comments misled jury | No prosecutorial misconduct; lack of remorse is mitigating factor | Waived for lack of contemporaneous objection; no merit on merits |
| Severance and other issues (briefed) | Severance denied; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Bracey, 541 Pa. 322, 662 A.2d 1062 (1995 Pa.) (admission of statements and policy for 404(b) evidence in capital case)
- Commonwealth v. Flor, 606 Pa. 384, 998 A.2d 606 (2010 Pa.) (victim impact and life-in-being guidance in sentencing phases)
- Commonwealth v. Rivers, 537 Pa. 394, 644 A.2d 710 (1994 Pa.) (life-in-being evidence admissibility limits; pre-1995 law context)
- Commonwealth v. Singley, 582 Pa. 5, 868 A.2d 403 (2005 Pa.) (sufficiency review and plea basis in capital cases)
- Commonwealth v. Tedford, 598 Pa. 639, 960 A.2d 1 (2008 Pa.) (victim impact evidence statutory framework; capital sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Philistin, 53 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2012) (plea in capital case and evidentiary impact on trial)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997) (limits of stipulations and government proof in evidentiary presentation)