Commonwealth v. Robinson
33 A.3d 89
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Robinson, a home health care worker, assessed client Susan Chernin on Aug 31, 2008 after a shoulder surgery; jewelry valued over $8,000 disappeared from Chernin's bedroom shortly after his visit.
- Trial was a non-jury bench trial; Commonwealth charged theft by unlawful taking and theft by receiving stolen property; Robinson testified with character witnesses; court convicted him of unlawful taking and acquitted him of receiving stolen property; restitution was deferred pending value calculation.
- On Dec 29, 2009 the court, sua sponte, vacated the judgment of sentence and entered a verdict of not guilty, stating it failed to give due weight to character evidence.
- Commonwealth filed a motion for reconsideration; a subsequent judge held a hearing and ultimately the May 26, 2010 order which suggested only the Superior Court could reverse the trial court; the Commonwealth appealed.
- The Superior Court reversed the May 26, 2010 order, reinstated the original guilty verdict and sentence, and remanded for a restitution proceeding; evidence was found legally sufficient to sustain theft by unlawful taking.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had authority to sua sponte arrest judgment and alter the verdict after recording. | Commonwealth contends the court lacked post-verdict authority. | Robinson argues the court had inherent power to grant post-trial relief. | Trial court exceeded authority; post-verdict court may not reweigh evidence or substitute a new verdict. |
| Whether 42 Pa.C.S. § 5505 permits sua sponte post-verdict correction. | Commonwealth relies on statute to permit correction. | Robinson relies on statutory allowances for post-verdict adjustments. | Statute provision does not authorize sua sponte change of a verdict after judgment. |
| Whether Pa.R.Crim.P. 704(B)(1) authorized the trial court to sua sponte change the verdict. | Commonwealth argues rule allows arrest of judgment before sentencing under extraordinary circumstances. | Robinson asserts rule supports post-trial relief. | Rule 704 does not authorize the trial court to sua sponte alter a verdict post-verdict. |
| Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to sustain the theft by unlawful taking. | Evidence supported a finding of unlawful taking. | Defense contends insufficiency after reweighing weight of evidence. | Yes; the evidence, viewed in the Commonwealth’s favor, suffices to uphold the verdict. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Holmes, 593 Pa. 601, 933 A.2d 57 (Pa. 2007) (patent error correction in sentencing under § 5505; not controlling here)
- Commonwealth v. Parker, 305 Pa. Super. 516, 451 A.2d 767 (Pa. Super. 1982) (post-verdict authority limitations; cannot sua sponte change verdict)
- Commonwealth v. Stark, 526 Pa. 1, 584 A.2d 289 (Pa. 1990) (reinstated original guilty verdict after sua sponte not guilty at sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Melechio, 442 Pa. Super. 231, 658 A.2d 1385 (Pa. Super. 1995) (post-verdict reweighing not permitted; limited to sufficiency review)
- Commonwealth v. Gaither, 355 Pa. Super. 502, 513 A.2d 1034 (Pa. Super. 1986) (trial court cannot alter verdict on credibility reassessment during post-trial motions)
- Commonwealth v. Farinella, 887 A.2d 273, 276 n.4 (Pa. Super. 2005) (verdict pronouncement cannot be corrected by post-verdict reweighing; limited to arrest of judgment)