Commonwealth v. Perez
2011 Pa. LEXIS 3184
| Pa. | 2014Background
- Albert Perez was sentenced to death on two counts of first-degree murder and abuse of a corpse after a jury trial.
- The killings involved Diaz-Santiago and her five-year-old daughter Kayla, with evidence suggesting strangulation and homicide, not suicide.
- Police investigated after an email allegedly from Diaz-Santiago urged Liz Ruiz to kill Diaz-Santiago’s ex-partner while leaving Diaz-Santiago unharmed.
- Forensic and circumstantial evidence linked Perez to the apartment the morning of the murders, including fibers, cords, and a PlayStation console tied to the scene.
- Perez gave multiple police statements over months with evolving versions of events, and the Commonwealth presented extensive expert testimony at trial.
- On direct appeal, Perez challenged guilt and penalty-phase rulings, but the court largely found briefing deficiencies and deferral to collateral review for ineffective-assistance claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree murder | Perez argues the evidence is circumstantial and insufficient to prove malice and a specific intent to kill | State contends the Commonwealth proved each element beyond a reasonable doubt | Evidence supported first-degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Sufficiency of aggravating factors | Perez contends aggravators were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt | State asserts proven aggravators (prior murder conviction and child victim) supported death sentences | Sufficient evidence supported the aggravating factors for both murders. |
| Weight of the evidence | Weight claim asserting the mitigating factors outweighed aggravators | State argues weighing is prerogative of factfinder; claims proper and supported by record | Weighing claims are largely waived; cannot be reviewed on direct appeal; no relief granted on weight. |
| § 9711(h)(3) inquiry and inflammatory photograph | Photograph of Kayla inflamed jury passion; death sentence product of passion/arbitrary factors | Issue waived due to trial counsel’s failure to object; collateral review deferred | Statutory review conducted; evidence supported aggravators; photograph issue waived without prejudice to PCRA relief. |
| Ineffectiveness claims of counsel (direct appeal) | Numerous ineffectiveness claims raised on direct appeal | Holmes/Garbage-era rule requires PCRA review; Bomar deferral inappropriate | Direct-appeal ineffectiveness claims dismissed without prejudice to raise in a timely PCRA petition. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Chamberlain, 612 Pa. 107 (Pa. 2011) (sufficiency review for first-degree murder and aggravating factors; independent review required in death cases)
- Commonwealth v. Johnson, 604 Pa. 176 (Pa. 2009) (limits on weighing and review of aggravating/mitigating factors; evidentiary standards)
- Commonwealth v. Briggs, 608 Pa. 430 (Pa. 2011) (briefing requirements and preservation of issues; comprehensive argument needed)
- Commonwealth v. Zettlemoyer, 500 Pa. 16 (Pa. 1982) (state death-penalty procedures permissible; constitutional baseline)
- Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (U.S. 2008) (standard for evaluating method of lethal injection under Eighth Amendment)
- Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (U.S. 1976) (reaffirmed constitutionality of guided discretion death penalty systems)