Commonwealth v. Reid, A., Aplt
627 Pa. 151
| Pa. | 2014Background
- March 7, 1989: After snowballs hit his car, Anthony Reid (aka "Tone") and passengers chased a group of boys; shots were fired and 16‑year‑old Michael Waters was killed. 10mm casings and .38 caliber projectiles were recovered. Six days later a 10mm was used in the Wilkinson killing; ballistics linked the 10mm casings from both scenes.
- Reid was tried (second trial after mistrial), convicted of first‑degree murder and related offenses, and sentenced to death; this Court affirmed on direct appeal in 1993.
- Reid filed a pro se PCRA petition in 1996 and multiple amended/supplemental petitions; the PCRA court issued notice to dismiss and ultimately dismissed the petitions in 2007. Reid appealed; PCRA denial affirmed by the Supreme Court.
- Major claims raised: Batson challenge to peremptory strikes; failure to request Kloiber (cautionary) identification instruction; admissibility and Brady issues about witness Woods; ballistics/forensics challenges; trial and appellate counsel ineffectiveness for various omissions; penalty‑phase mitigation and prosecutorial argument issues.
- Procedural complications: numerous supplemental filings (some apparently unauthorized and found waived); scheduled evidentiary hearings that Reid’s counsel repeatedly delayed or opposed; the PCRA court often denied discovery, expert funds, and hearings where Reid failed to make required showings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Reid) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Batson peremptory strikes | Prosecutor struck disproportionately more Black venirepersons; Reid sought discovery, expert funds, and a hearing to prove purposeful discrimination | Commonwealth argued record inadequate, much data missing, and broader evidence (Baldus study, McMahon tape) insufficient to prove purposeful discrimination in this case | No Batson relief: record incomplete, evidence proffered (studies/tapes) insufficient to prove purposeful discrimination; denial of discovery/funds not abuse of discretion | |
| Failure to request Kloiber instruction | Trial counsel should have requested Kloiber for eyewitnesses (McKay, Keenan, Coggins) due to prior non‑identifications/misidentifications | Commonwealth and PCRA court: factual record showed photo arrays often did not include Reid; witnesses made in‑court IDs and explanations rendered Kloiber unnecessary; credibility for jury | No ineffectiveness: no Kloiber warranted based on record; credibility issues would not compel relief; no remand for hearing required | |
| Admission / Brady regarding Woods & other evidence | Woods made prior statements implicating Reid and/or others; Commonwealth withheld exculpatory/impeachment material; requested police archive review and discovery | Commonwealth said trial file contained no such undisclosed statements/material; Reid failed to identify specific suppressed documents or make good‑cause showing for discovery | Denied: PCRA court credited Commonwealth representation, Reid failed to show existence or materiality of undisclosed evidence, so no Brady relief or discovery | |
| Ballistics / forensic reliability | Trial counsel failed to develop rebuttal ballistics; NAS report later undermines ballistic matching reliability; sought funds for experts to show fatal wound inflicted by .38 not 10mm | Commonwealth: ballistics evidence used to show presence; medical and scene evidence supported .38 fatality; NAS claims raised post‑PCRA and were not presented below | Denied: proposed expert testimony would be cumulative; claim based on NAS report not raised in PCRA so waived; no prejudice shown | |
| Failure to present composite sketch and impeachment of Coggins | Sketch did not resemble Reid (supported misidentification defense); Coggins had burglary charges after interviews which could impeach | PCRA court found sketch resembled Reid; burglary charges were not pending at time of testimony/interview so not admissible impeachment | Denied: no prejudice or error; claims waived where raised only in unauthorized supplements | |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in guilt/penalty closings | Prosecutor appealed to jurors’ fear of crime, labeled Reid ("gangster/gunslinger"), urged jurors to "cut his kind out"; improperly commented on remorse and future dangerousness | Commonwealth: remarks were grounded in evidence and permissible oratorical flair; jury instructions cured any minimal prejudice | Denied: remarks evaluated in context; not shown to create unavoidable bias; no ineffective assistance for failing to object | |
| Jury instruction on accomplice liability | Jury instruction allowed conviction based on accomplice intent rather than Reid’s own specific intent to kill | Reid argued this permitted conviction absent required mens rea | Commonwealth: instruction viewed in full context with correct definitions of first‑degree murder and intent | Denied: charge, read as a whole, adequately instructed on specific intent and accomplice liability; no Huffman error requiring relief |
| Penalty‑phase mitigation and evidentiary hearing | Counsel failed to investigate and present substantial mitigation (family, school, foster‑care, mental health) and denied expert funds and hearing | Commonwealth: mitigation presented (two foster sisters); many records/affidavits unsworn/conflict with trial testimony; Reid delayed hearings and failed to make showings for funds | Denied: many mitigation claims raised first in unauthorized supplements (waived); Reid frustrated scheduled hearings; no demonstrated prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) (peremptory strikes based on race violate Equal Protection)
- Kloiber v. Commonwealth, 378 Pa. 412, 106 A.2d 820 (Pa. 1954) (special cautionary instruction where identification is uncertain or prior IDs failed)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (ineffective assistance two‑prong performance/prejudice test)
- Commonwealth v. Pierce, 567 Pa. 186, 786 A.2d 203 (2001) (Pennsylvania application of Strickland)
- Commonwealth v. Ligons, 601 Pa. 103, 971 A.2d 1125 (2009) (studies/tapes showing generalized discriminatory practices insufficient alone to prove purposeful discrimination in a particular case)
- Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 618 Pa. 262, 55 A.3d 1108 (2012) (Batson/record requirements re: venire composition and struck jurors)
- Commonwealth v. Walker, 613 Pa. 601, 36 A.3d 1 (2011) (procedural guidance re: layered ineffective‑assistance claims and pleading/amendment practice)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution suppression of material exculpatory evidence violates due process)
- Commonwealth v. Huffman, 536 Pa. 196, 638 A.2d 961 (1994) (limitations on accomplice‑intent jury instructions; considered in later cases)
- Commonwealth v. Daniels, 600 Pa. 1, 963 A.2d 409 (2009) (evaluates accomplice instruction in context of entire charge)