Commonwealth v. Phillips
93 A.3d 847
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- Phillips was convicted by jury of unlawful body armor and possessing an instrument of crime; simple assault was acquitted.
- Officers responding to a 911 call found a handgun in plain view, later seized from a bed area where Phillips was present.
- Phillips wore a ballistic Kevlar vest; ammunition was recovered in the vest pocket.
- Trial proceeded with Phillips representing himself pro se with standby counsel after multiple waiver proceedings.
- The court vacated the sentence and remanded due to defective on-record waivers of counsel at multiple stages; the sufficiency of the unlawful body armor conviction was also reviewed.
- The Commonwealth argued the body armor crime applied because Phillips was committing a felony (possession of firearm) while wearing the armor; this was upheld as supported by the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 121 waivers were sufficiently inquired on the record. | Phillips argues waivers were not knowing, voluntary, intelligent. | Phillips contends the court failed to conduct thorough colloquies. | Remanded for proper Rule 121 colloquies; flawed waivers require reversal. |
| Whether the evidence sufficed to convict unlawful body armor. | Commonwealth maintained Phillips wore armor during a felony. | Phillips claimed only possession of a firearm, not a violent felony. | Evidence sufficient; however, remand for waiver deficiencies required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Payson, 723 A.2d 695 (Pa. Super. 1999) (knowing, intelligent waiver requires knowledge of rights and consequences)
- Commonwealth v. Houtz, 856 A.2d 119 (Pa. Super. 2004) (on-record waiver prerequisites; multiple stages require thorough colloquy)
- Commonwealth v. Mallory, 596 Pa. 172 (Pa. 2008) (waiver colloquy is a procedural tool, not rights themselves; totality limits apply later)
- Commonwealth v. McDonough, 571 Pa. 232 (2002) (requires defendant's ability to understand colloquy; elements of offenses explained)
- Commonwealth v. Clyburn, 42 A.3d 296 (Pa. Super. 2012) (court must advise on the nature and elements of the offenses before waiver)
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 874 A.2d 108 (Pa. Super. 2005) (standard for sufficiency of evidence; circumstantial evidence permissible)