Commonwealth v. Bellman

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. LUDDIE BELLMAN Appellant

J-S56010-20

No. 2210 EDA 2019

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

April 8, 2021

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered February 19, 2019

In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0006955-2017, MC-51-CR-0019439-2017

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., KUNSELMAN, J., and PELLEGRINI, J.^*

MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.:

Appellant, Luddie Bellman, appeals from the February 19, 2019 judgment of sentence of an aggregate term of 13 to 26 years' imprisonment, imposed after he was convicted of one count each of third-degree murder,¹ carrying a firearm without a license,² carrying a firearm on a public street in Philadelphia,³ and possessing an instrument of crime ("PIC"),⁴ and two countsof violations of the Uniform Firearms Act ("VUFA"), possession of a firearm by a prohibited person.⁵ Appellant challenges the jury instructions regarding the justification of the use of deadly force, contests the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his convictions, and alleges the verdict is against the weight of the evidence. After careful review, we affirm.

The trial court provided the following summary of the relevant facts of this matter in its Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion:

On the afternoon of June 30, 2017, Lacricia Hines and her cousins[,] Frank Stewart [("Stewart")] and Edward Neal [("Neal")], the decedent, went to visit Lacricia's mother, Patricia Hines, who was working at a flea market near the intersection of 25^th Street and Lehigh Avenue in Philadelphia. Patricia's fiancé, [Appellant], owned the flea market[,] and Patricia ran its day[-]to[-]day operations. Throughout the course of the afternoon, [Appellant] stopped by the flea market multiple times to check on how everything was going. Eventually [he] came back to break down the flea market and close for the day. During this time, [Appellant] got into an argument with Patricia and called her a bitch. After hearing [him] call his aunt a bitch, Stewart confronted [Appellant] and told him he was being disrespectful. The two men had a brief argument[,] and then Patricia and Lacricia told Stewart to walk away. Shortly thereafter, [Appellant] left in his truck[;] Neal, Stewart[,] and Lacricia left in Lacricia's Jeep[;] and Patricia began walking to the home she shared with [Appellant at] 2413 Oakdale Street, which is approximately half a block away from the flea market. Before they left, Patricia told Lacricia that she wanted [Lacricia] to take [her] to [Lacricia's] aunt's house. They agreedthat Patricia would walk to her home and pack her things, and Lacricia would later pick her up.

Before going to Patricia and [Appellant's] house, Lacricia, Neal, and Stewart went to another cousin's house on Cleveland Street. On the way to their cousin's house, the three discussed their concern about Patricia's safety because of the way [Appellant] had treated her. After spending approximately 20 minutes at their cousin's house, Lacricia, Neal[,] and Stewart left and headed for [Appellant] and Patricia's house.

When they arrived at the house, Lacricia parked her Jeep across the street[,] ... went in[to] the house by opening an unlocked screen door[,] and preced[ed] through an already open[ed,] inside door. Neal and Stewart remained in the Jeep. Lacricia went upstairs to her mother's bedroom to check on how she was doing and to see if she was done packing. [Appellant] was not in the home. Shortly after Lacricia entered the home, Stewart left the Jeep, leaving Neal alone in the car. Then Stewart went on the porch and knocked on the screen door. From upstairs, Patricia yelled for Stewart to come in. Stewart made his way upstairs to use the bathroom and subsequently went into Patricia's room where she was still packing her clothes. Both Patricia and Lacricia told Stewart that he should leave the house before [Appellant] got there.

As Stewart was walking down the stairs to leave the house, [Appellant] walked through the front door into the living room. When [Appellant] saw Stewart, he asked him who he was and told him to get out of his house. In response, Stewart told [Appellant] that he was not leaving without Patricia and Lacricia. [Appellant] again told Stewart to leave, and Stewart gave the same response. Overhearing the two men from upstairs, Lacricia went to the middle of the steps and told Stewart to leave. In response, Stewart began to walk past [Appellant] towards the door. As Stewart walked by him, [Appellant] pushed him towards the door. Stewart told [Appellant] not to push him, but [Appellant] pushed him again. In response, Stewart punched [Appellant] on the right side of his face. Then the two men engaged in a fistfight. Meanwhile, Lacricia had come downstairs and sat on the couch, and Neal had left the Jeep and made his way onto the porch. Neal came in through the open front door and attempted to break up the fight, which was occurring in the living room near the front door. Neal grabbed Stewart, who was 5 feet and 3 inches tall and weighed 156 pounds, and pushed him up against the wall adjacentto the front door. [Appellant] began to back up into the dining room, which was connected to the living room, and pulled out a .38 revolver from the back of his pants. When [he] stopped backing up, he stood in the living room near the drum set and fired five shots in the direction of Stewart and Neal. Neal, who was now standing in the middle of the living room between Stewart and [Appellant], was struck by two bullets in his right upper arm and the right side of his neck.

After the gunshots stopped, Lacricia ran back upstairs to her mother's bedroom. Stewart saw Neal fall to the ground and then made his way towards [Appellant]. Stewart put [Appellant] in a chokehold and forced the gun out of [his] hand. Stewart then ran outside on the porch and threw the gun onto the middle of the street. As Stewart was running out the door with the gun, [Appellant] began to run upstairs and told Stewart that he had "another one." [Appellant] went into Patricia's room and told her[,] "bitch, I'mma kill you next." While [Appellant] made his way to the closet in the room, Lacricia ran downstairs and out of the house.

Meanwhile, Stewart had come back inside the house to check on Neal. Stewart's cell phone was not working properly so he ran back outside and yelled for someone to call an ambulance. Then he saw [Appellant] walk out the door to the porch and hand an unknown object to a white male. [Appellant] and the white male then walked to [Appellant's] truck, which was parked approximately 4 houses away from [Appellant's] house, got in, and turned on the ignition[,] but did not drive away.

Shortly thereafter, officers arrived on the scene and entered [Appellant's] house. They found Neal's body[,] ... loaded it into a police car[,] and rushed him to Temple Hospital, where he died sometime thereafter. The bullet that had struck Neal's arm went through his torso and perforated one of his ribs, his right lung, and his heart. The medical examiner determined that the cause of death was the gunshot wound.

When officers arrived, Stewart pointed to [Appellant's] truck and told them that the man responsible for shooting his cousin was sitting in it. Officers approached the truck[,] and [Appellant] was placed under arrest. Officers discovered a .22 revolver inside of a flowerpot behind [Appellant's] truck.

TCO at 3-7 (citations to record and footnotes omitted).

At trial, the Commonwealth presented testimony from two eyewitnesses, Stewart and Lacricia; the medical examiner, Dr. Lindsay Simon; several police officers; and experts in DNA analysis and gunshot residue. Appellant testified on his own behalf and presented testimony from Officer Raymond Lacey, who responded to the scene, and from Appellant's girlfriend, Khea Phillips. Appellant conceded to the use of deadly force, which resulted in Neal's death, but claimed that he believed he was in imminent danger and fired his weapon in self-defense. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury found Appellant guilty of third-degree murder, carrying a firearm without a license, carrying a firearm on the streets of Philadelphia, and PIC. In a bifurcated proceeding, the jury also found Appellant guilty of VUFA § 6105.

On February 19, 2019, the trial court sentenced Appellant to an aggregate term of 13 to 26 years' imprisonment. Appellant filed a timely motion for reconsideration, which was denied by the trial court on June 4, 2019. On July 3, 2019, Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, followed by a timely, court-ordered Rule 1925(b) concise statement of matters complained of on appeal.

Herein, Appellant presents the following questions for our review:

1. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by reaching a conclusion which overrode and misinterpreted the law, or by an omission in jury charges that amount to fundamental error?

2. Was the evidence sufficient to sustain ... Appellant's convictions for murder in the third degree[ and PIC], and [the finding] that deadly force was not justified beyond a reasonable doubt?

3. Was conviction for murder in the third degree[ and PIC], and the [finding that the] use of deadly force was not justified against the weight of the evidence?

Appellant's Brief at 4-5 (unnecessary capitalization and proposed answers omitted).⁶

I. Challenge to Jury Instructions

First, we address Appellant's challenge to the jury instructions on self-defense, the presumption of a reasonable belief that deadly force is justified, and the circumstances under which the presumption does not apply. This Court recently stated:

When a court instructs the jury, the objective is to explain to the jury how it should approach its task and the factors it should consider in reaching its verdict. In examining jury instructions, our standard of review is to determine whether the trial court committed a clear abuse of discretion or an error of law

...