In the Interest of C.S.
63 A.3d 351
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Juvenile entered Turkey Hill at night, threatened clerk by claim of a gun outside, and stole items from the counter; clerk retreated, items taken were lighter and chips; surveillance video and statements supported clerk’s account.
- Commonwealth charged theft and robbery; adjudication found delinquency for theft and robbery-by-force however slight (18 Pa.C.S. § 3701(a)(1)(v)).
- Dispositional hearing followed; post-dispositional motion denied; appeal timely filed; issues challenge sufficiency and weight of the evidence.
- Court considered statutory interpretation of robbery and whether force can be constructive; emphasized standard of review for sufficiency and for weight of the evidence.
- Video corroborated clerk’s account; clerk consistently reported events to police and manager; juveniles admitted taking items; court did not abuse its discretion on weight claim; evidence supports robbery-forces however slight under § 3701(a)(1)(v).
- Surveillance video not in certified record, limiting appellate view of video.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of force under robbery (a)(1)(v) | Juvenile argues no actual force; no contact; threat does not equal force. | Commonwealth: force may be constructive via threat; clerk yielded items. | Sufficient: threat and stepping back constituted constructive force. |
| Weight of the evidence to sustain the robbery finding | Juvenile contends video fails to show threat/force and clerk dishonest. | Commonwealth: clerk credible; video corroborates; lack ofWeightiness not shown. | Not shocked by weight; court did not abuse discretion; credibility and video support verdict. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 506 Pa. 169 (1984) (force may be actual or constructive in robbery statute history)
- Commonwealth v. Velez, 51 A.3d 260 (Pa.Super.2012) (statutory interpretation; strict construction of criminal statutes)
- Commonwealth v. Champney, 574 Pa. 435 (2003) (standard for reviewing weight of the evidence claims)
- Commonwealth v. Lofton, 2012 Pa. Super. 267, 57 A.3d 1270 (Pa. Super. 2012) (weight claim must be preserved; limited appellate role on weight)