Commonwealth v. Maisonet, 31 A.3d 689

Colon participated in Arroyos drug organization; Figueroa murdered in Colon home; Pirela brothers convicted in separate trials; Appellant located extradited from Puerto Rico in 1990; Commonwealth tied Figueroa killing to prior Slafman robbery-homicide and sought to prove consciousness of guilt; trial included America’s Most Wanted videotape with limiting instructions; defense admitted presence but denied participation in killing; multiple evidentiary and procedural delays and lost records surrounding exhibits.
Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder as an accomplice; five aggravating circumstances were argued, four found by the jury; no mitigating circumstances were found; retrial in Slafman case later resulted in acquittal; current direct appeal challenges evidentiary and due process issues, including the videotape and motive evidence.
Record gaps: deleted or lost portions of key exhibits and incomplete trial record; videotape used but portions of content undisclosed; prior trial transcripts were not provided Brady-material, according to court analysis.
Court affirmed death sentence after weighing passion/prejudice, noting substantial but unknowable impact of the videotape; at least one aggravator (previous voluntary manslaughter) supported the sentence.
Appellant sought extraordinary relief after Slafman acquittal; trial court denied; this opinion addresses whether the acquittal undermines Commonwealth’s motive theory and warrants retrial or relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence for first-degree murder	Maisonet asserts insufficient evidence given conflicts on his role	Maisonet contends lack of direct participation; acquittal in related case undermines motive	Sufficiency upheld; direct eyewitness and corroborating evidence support conviction
Effect of Slafman acquittal on motive evidence	Acquittal should negate motive evidence and require retrial	Acquittal not equivalent to factual innocence; not automatic retrial	No retrial required; acquittal does not mandate reversal or new trial on motive grounds
Brady issue regarding access to transcripts	Failure to disclose prior trial transcripts violated Brady and cross-examination rights	Transcripts publicly available; claim should be post-conviction; not Brady material	Public transcripts not Brady material; issue deferred for post-conviction relief
America’s Most Wanted videotape admissibility and prejudice	Tape was prejudicial and unnecessary; prejudicial effect outweighed probative value	Tape used as demonstrative evidence of consciousness of guilt with limiting instructions	Direct evidentiary preservation issues; court acknowledges prejudice but cannot determine specific portions shown; otherwise affirmed under statutory review; not reversible on direct appeal

Commonwealth v. Morales, 508 Pa. 51, 494 A.2d 367 (1985) (context of related Pirela cases and conspiracy evidence)
Commonwealth v. Tirado, 341 Pa.Super. 620, 491 A.2d 922 (1985) (related to Arroyos leadership and impressions of trial record)
Commonwealth v. McCall, 567 Pa. 165, 786 A.2d 191 (2001) (acquittal in related offense not per se invalidating motive evidence)
Dowling v. United States, 493 U.S. 342, 110 S.Ct. 668 (1990) (acquittal evidence and collateral estoppel guidance in retrial)
Commonwealth v. Small, 559 Pa. 423, 741 A.2d 666 (1999) (after-discovered evidence must be material to guilt/innocence)
Commonwealth v. Serge, 586 Pa. 671, 896 A.2d 1170 (2006) (demonstrative evidence admissibility and limits; Serge facts distinguished)
Commonwealth v. Pursell, 555 Pa. 233, 724 A.2d 293 (1999) (Brady/public-access transcripts not Brady material)
Commonwealth v. Reed, 607 Pa. 629, 9 A.3d 1138 (2010) (acknowledgment of acquittals' significance)
Commonwealth v. King, 554 Pa. 331, 721 A.2d 763 (1998) (proportionality and aggravation considerations in capital cases)