Commonwealth v. Whitaker
30 A.3d 1195
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Whitaker was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder and possession of an instrument of crime.
- The trial imposed life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and a concurrent 9–24 month sentence for possession of an instrument of crime.
- Whitaker was 17 years old at the time of the offense, which occurred on September 10, 2007.
- The defense challenged the sentence as cruel and unusual punishment and as a due process violation due to juvenile status.
- The Commonwealth presented extensive physical and testimonial evidence including a hammer, sword, bloody shirt, DNA, and multiple witnesses placing Whitaker at the scene.
- The Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence after reviewing trial evidence and statutory standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether life without parole for a 17-year-old is unconstitutional | Whitaker | Commonwealth | Claim rejected; no due process or cruel/unusual punishment violation |
| Whether evidence established specific intent to kill | Whitaker | Commonwealth | Evidence sufficient to show specific intent; verdict supported |
Key Cases Cited
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (U.S. 2005) (juvenile death penalty barred; life without parole discussed as severe sanction)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. 2010) (life without parole unconstitutional for juveniles in non-homicide offenses)
- Commonwealth v. Ortiz, 17 A.3d 417 (Pa. Super. 2011) (PCRA exceptions not available to after-acquired rights for juvenile-life sentences)
- Commonwealth v. Aziz, 724 A.2d 371 (Pa. Super. 1999) (juvenile decertification context and due process considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Mollett, 5 A.3d 291 (Pa. Super. 2010) (specific intent may be inferred from circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Donnelly, 439 Pa. Super. 70 (Pa. Super. 1995) (instant formation of specific intent)
- Commonwealth v. Cousar, 593 Pa. 204 (2007) (deadly weapon on vital parts of body supports intent to kill)
- Commonwealth v. Tharp, 574 Pa. 202 (2003) (analysis of specific intent elements and methods of proof)