Commonwealth v. Martinez
153 A.3d 1025
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- August 8, 2014, in Philadelphia, Martinez robbed complainant at a alley-side location, threatening with a silver revolver and taking $50 and a cell phone.
- Martinez then fled; police later arrested him and found the victim’s phone on Martinez’s person; no gun or money were recovered from Martinez’s residence.
- February 4, 2015, a bench trial resulted in convictions on multiple counts, including robbery, terroristic threats, simple assault, and reckless endangerment, among others.
- The court sentenced Martinez to six to twelve years for robbery, with concurrent terms for related offenses including possession of firearm prohibited and terroristic threats, among others.
- Martinez timely appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence for terroristic threats and the legality of sentencing due to merger of certain offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of terroristic threats evidence | Martinez argues no verbal threat; no explicit threat of violence communicated. | Martinez argues the threat element not satisfied by words alone. | Terroristic threats proven by combined words and conduct creating fear of violence. |
| Legality of sentence due to merger | Martinez contends robbery and certain offenses should merge for sentencing. | The court should merge some but not all offenses; sentencing scheme may be illegal if improper merges. | Terroristic threats merged with robbery; other offenses did not merge; overall sentence affirmed except for the merged count. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Reynolds, 835 A.2d 720 (Pa. Super. 2003) (threats need not be explicit; context can sustain terroristic threats)
- Commonwealth v. Sinnott, 976 A.2d 1184 (Pa. Super. 2009) (threats implied by circumstances may satisfy the offense)
- Commonwealth v. Hudgens, 582 A.2d 1352 (Pa. Super. 1990) (no need to inform victim of specific crime threatened)
- Commonwealth v. White, 335 A.2d 436 (Pa. Super. 1975) (threat to commit crime proven by circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 96 A.3d 1055 (Pa. Super. 2014) (merger analysis for sentencing; two acts vs. single act)
- Commonwealth v. Kimmel, 125 A.3d 1272 (Pa. Super. 2015) (en banc; use of separate acts evidenced by charging and records to avoid merger)
- Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 985 A.2d 830 (Pa. 2009) (two-element test for merger under Section 9765)
- Commonwealth v. Wade, 33 A.3d 108 (Pa. Super. 2011) (merger inquiry for sentencing under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9765)
- Commonwealth v. Pettersen, 49 A.3d 903 (Pa. Super. 2012) (whether multiple acts constitute separate crimes for merger)
- Commonwealth v. Quintua, 56 A.3d 399 (Pa. Super. 2012) (discusses merger framework under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9765)