Commonwealth v. Orie
88 A.3d 983
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- Orie was convicted of theft, conspiracy, conflict of interest, and tampering with or fabricating evidence in two related dockets; trial court imposed aggregate 30–120 months and restitution plus $110,650 in reimbursement to Senate Caucus counsel under 18 Pa.C.S. § 5303.
- A mistrial at the first trial due to allegedly forged defense exhibits led to repleading and a second trial with additional charges (Docket Nos. 201010285 and 201112098).
- During the second trial, forged documents from the first trial were admitted by Orie, leading to further charges including forgery and tainting with evidence; the Commonwealth sought restitution for outside counsel fees incurred by the Caucus.
- Orie challenged double jeopardy, suppression, testimony rulings, weight and sufficiency of forgery evidence, and the constitutionality of § 1103(a), among other issues.
- The Superior Court affirmed the convictions and the restitution/reimbursement, addressing each issue on the merits and upholding the trial court’s rulings.
- Key procedural posture: post-sentence appeals followed, with multiple opinions preceding the 2013 decision affirming judgment of sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double jeopardy bar for retrial | Orie asserts lack of manifest necessity to declare mistrial. | State argues the fraud-on-the-court and risk of tainted verdict justified mistrial. | Manfiest necessity supported; retrial not barred. |
| Preclusion of witness testimony | MacNett's testimony would rebut prosecution witness on comp time rules. | MacNett's testimony irrelevant to defense’s theory; comp time policy disputed. | No abuse; testimony properly excluded. |
| Suppression of physical evidence | Warrants were overbroad; taint team defective; privileges violated. | Special Master review and subsequent particularity warrants cured issues; taint team not used. | Suppression not warranted; warrants and taint-team procedures valid. |
| Forgery convictions: sufficiency | Evidence insufficient to prove Orie forged documents or knew of forgeries. | Evidence showed Orie possessed altered documents and authenticated them; she knew of forgeries. | Sufficient evidence; conviction upheld. |
| Forgery convictions: weight of the evidence | Weight favors acquittal; jury biased by forged documents. | Jury credibility determinations supported by record; no miscarriage of justice. | Weight of the evidence not disturbed; no new trial warranted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Harper, 890 A.2d 1078 (Pa. Super. 2006) (fraud-on-the-court authority to remedy false evidence)
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944) (fraud vitiates judgments; court may rescind obtained by fraud)
- Commonwealth v. Diehl, 532 Pa. 214, 615 A.2d 690 (1992) (manifest necessity standard for mistrial; no rigid formula)
- Commonwealth v. Leister, 712 A.2d 332 (Pa. Super. 1998) (discretion in declaring mistrial; ends of justice standard)
- United States v. Perez, 9 Wheat. 579 (1824) (double jeopardy framework for retrial after mistrial)