Commonwealth v. Reed
42 A.3d 314
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2012Background
- Reed was convicted at trial in 2007 of rape of a child, IDSI, aggravated indecent assault, indecent assault, unlawful contact with a minor, and corruption of minors arising from sexual abuse of his girlfriend's 8-year-old daughter, M.M.
- In 2007 Reed received an aggregate sentence of 10 to 20 years imprisonment; no post-sentence motions were filed, but a timely appeal was filed in 2008.
- In 2009 the Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence; Reed did not seek allowance of appeal with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
- In 2010 Reed filed a timely counseled PCRA petition asserting trial counsel ineffectiveness; an evidentiary hearing was held in October 2010 and the PCRA petition was denied.
- On appeal Reed challenges trial counsel's handling of (a) a reference to his invocation of the right to counsel and (b) the admission of prior out-of-court statements by the victim, arguing ineffective assistance.
- The court ultimately affirmed the denial of PCRA relief, concluding no prejudice established and the challenged strategies had a reasonable basis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to reference to Reed's invocation of his right to counsel | Reed | Reed | No prejudice; reference limited to context, not used to prove guilt |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective for allowing prior out-of-court statements by the victim to be admitted | Reed | Reed | No ineffective assistance; strategies had reasonable basis and no greater likelihood of success |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Colavita, 606 Pa. 1, 993 A.2d 874 (Pa. 2010) (Sixth Amendment right to counsel; timing and application)
- Commonwealth v. Molina, 33 A.3d 51 (Pa. Super. 2011) (Pre-arrest silence not admissible as substantive evidence of guilt)
- Commonwealth v. DiNicola, 581 Pa. 550, 866 A.2d 329 (Pa. 2005) (Pre-arrest silence references; fair response permitted under certain limits)
- Commonwealth v. Hayes, 755 A.2d 27 (Pa. Super. 2000) (Distinguishing Fifth and Sixth Amendment right to counsel)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 572 Pa. 623, 819 A.2d 504 (Pa. 2002) (Standard for evaluating ineffectiveness claims; hindsight not allowed)