Commonwealth v. Munday
78 A.3d 661
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Appellant Herbert Munday was convicted in a non-jury trial of drug and firearm offenses and received an aggregate sentence of 5–10 years.
- The sentence included a 5-year mandatory minimum under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9712.1 due to possession or control of a firearm during the drug offense.
- Evidence showed controlled drug purchases at 2844 Bailey Street in May 2008 and recovery of firearms at a search warrant the same night; drugs were not found on the premises.
- On appeal, Munday challenged the legality of the mandatory minimum under Alleyne v. United States, arguing the facts necessary for § 9712.1 were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The trial court and appellate proceedings included a supplemental brief addressing Alleyne after the Supreme Court decision, and issues were litigated as to whether § 9712.1 complies with Apprendi/Alleyne.
- The Superior Court vacated the judgment of sentence and remanded for resentencing due to Alleyne, addressing the requirement that the evidence establishing the mandatory minimum be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is § 9712.1 unconstitutional after Alleyne? | Munday relies on Alleyne to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt for facts increasing the mandatory minimum. | The court treated the firearm-possession finding as a sentencing factor, not an element, thus proof by a preponderance was sufficient. | Vacate and remand for resentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, asi 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (facts increasing penalty beyond statutory maximum must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt)
- McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U.S. 79 (1986) (firearm-possession Sentencing factor not an element; not required to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002) (judicial factfinding increasing minimum sentence permissible when not increasing maximum)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (mandatory minimum facts must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt; elements vs sentencing factors redefined)
- Commonwealth v. Nguyen, 834 A.2d 1205 (Pa. Super. 2003) (sentencing factors not elements generally required to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Commonwealth v. Allen, 508 Pa. 114 (1985) (sentencing factors not elements require proof by a preponderance of the evidence)