Commonwealth v. Von Evans
163 A.3d 980
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2017Background
- Evans, incarcerated awaiting trial for rape-related convictions, asked his girlfriend (Kalesha Cruz) by phone and in person to contact the rape victim and offer money to prevent her from testifying. Cruz attempted to call the victim but never reached her. The victim was not contacted directly by Evans.
- Commonwealth charged Evans with Criminal Solicitation to Intimidate a Witness, Conspiracy to Commit Criminal Solicitation, and Witness Intimidation; the case proceeded on stipulated facts at a non-jury waiver trial.
- Trial court convicted Evans of Criminal Solicitation to Intimidate a Witness and sentenced him to 3.5 to 10 years, consecutive to an existing 40–80 year sentence from the underlying convictions.
- On appeal Evans challenged sufficiency of the evidence for a witness intimidation conviction, arguing an offer of money alone shows inducement, not intimidation, relying on Commonwealth v. Doughty.
- The trial court inferred intimidation partly from the violent nature of the underlying offenses and speculated the victim would be intimidated by an offer from her alleged rapist.
- The Superior Court reversed: it held that the Commonwealth produced only evidence of intent to induce (offer money) and lacked additional facts from which a factfinder could reasonably infer Evans intended to intimidate the victim. Speculation about the victim’s likely reaction or the gravity of the underlying crime alone was insufficient to prove intimidation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Evans intended to "intimidate" a witness under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4952(a)(6) when he requested a third party offer money to the victim | Commonwealth: the request to pay the victim not to appear, given the violent nature of the underlying crime, supports an inference of intimidation | Evans: an offer of money to prevent testimony is at most an inducement; Doughty requires additional circumstantial evidence to infer intent to intimidate | Reversed: evidence showed intent to induce, not to intimidate; conviction for solicitation of witness intimidation vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Doughty, 126 A.3d 951 (Pa. 2015) (pecuniary offers do not automatically establish "intimidation"; factfinder must assess totality of circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Lynch, 72 A.3d 706 (Pa. Super. 2013) (upheld witness intimidation where close relationship, repeated requests, and context supported inference of intimidation)
- Commonwealth v. Brackbill, 555 A.2d 82 (Pa. 1989) (discussed in Doughty regarding prior characterization of pecuniary offers as "inducement")