Commonwealth v. Edwards

229 A.3d 298

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania

v.Mark EDWARDS, Appellant

No. 3693 EDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Submitted October 16, 2019

Filed February 12, 2020

Karl Baker, Public Defender and Robin S. Forrest, Public Defender, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Lawrence J. Goode, Assistant District Attorney and Jessica A. Gurvich, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DUBOW, J., and COLINS, J.^*

OPINION BY BENDER, P.J.E.:

Appellant, Mark Edwards, appeals from the judgment of sentence of an aggregate term of 10-25 years' imprisonment, imposed after he was convicted of aggravated assault, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(a)(1), and related offenses. For the reasons that follow, we reverse four of his convictions, vacate the judgment of sentence, and remand.

The trial court summarized the relevant factual and procedural history as follows:

[O]n Saturday, August 15, 2015, just before 7:00 p.m., a tan 2004 Ford Mercury Grand Marquis occupied by a single male driver travelled at a high rate of speed and struck a moving vehicle occupied by two adults and one child in a residential neighborhood near the corners of Large Street and Magee Avenue in Northeast Philadelphia. Eyewitnesses observed that following the striking of the first occupied vehicle, the vehicle, ... [the] Marquis, then continued to travel erratically at a high rate of speed and without stopping, turned from Magee Avenue and onto the 6600 block of Sylvester Street[,] where it collided with multiple parked vehicles along the way.

After hitting numerous parked cars, witnesses saw this same vehicle strike a six[-]year[-]old child who had been riding her bike and playing on the sidewalk near her home located within the same block. The force of the collision sent this slight and small child flying into the air and landing head first in a neighbor's side garden. Appellant ... was then observed unsuccessfully attempting escape by driving the vehicle into another parked car[,] which blocked his exit. Appellant was seen immediately thereafter leaping from the driver's side of the car and running on foot away from the path of destruction he caused.

The injured child's mother, Nuris Quezada, reported that just before the crash she heard the screeching of an approaching vehicle as it swerved and sped down the 6600 block of Sylvester Street where she was standing in front of her home. As she saw the vehicle striking numerous parked cars, she ran immediately toward her daughter in an attempt to pull her from the sidewalk to safety. To her horror, she could not save her daughter due to the high rate of speed of the striking vehicle. She thought her daughter had died because she was found unconscious in the neighbor's yard. As Nuris Quezada ran to her daughter[,] she saw the back of the male driver of the striking vehicle as he exited the driver['s] side of the otherwise unoccupied vehicle and [ran] away from his misdeeds.

Najah Imani Caldwell testified that she had fully viewed the tan Marquis speed down the street, crash into a number of parked cars, hit a child[,] and then hit another parked car. She saw Appellant alight from the driver's side of the otherwise unoccupied Marquis and flee on foot. Her view was unobstructed, and ... close to the collision scene from the front steps of her residence located within the 6600 block of Sylvester Street. She was a teenager at the time who bravely came forward, provided a detailed description of the offender[,] and rode around the area with responding police officers to search for the man she saw operating the striking vehicle. She later unequivocally identified Appellant as the perpetrator. She consistently and positively identified Appellant at the preliminary hearing and at trial as the operator of the striking vehicle and as the man who she had seen jump out from the driver's side of the Marquis and run away from the crash site.^[1]

After several preliminary hearings, arraignment, and scheduling conferences, the case against [Appellant] proceeded to trial without a jury on April 21, 2017....

Over the course of the trial, the Commonwealth introduced compelling and varied forms of direct and circumstantial evidence from uniformed police officers, assigned investigators[,] the child victim, her mother[,] and other eyewitnesses to Appellant's actions. At trial, all of the medical records reflecting treatment of the child victim, who sustained traumatic injury to her head and a multi-fractured arm, as well as the damage reports concerning all involved vehicles[,] had been entered into the record by way of stipulation and stated agreement between the parties. At trial, the victim's mother reported that he[r] daughter's broken arm had never fully recovered despite medical treatment. Mercifully, this child reported that she has little memory of what happened to her. This [c]ourt, as the finder of fact, entered verdicts of guilt for all offenses charged after reviewing all submitted physical evidence and listening to the testimony and arguments presented.

This [c]ourt found Appellant ... guilty of the following offenses in order of gradation: one count of Aggravated Assault under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 2702 [ (a)(1) ], graded as a Felony of the First Degree; one count of Aggravated Assault-By Vehicle under 75 [Pa.C.S.] § 3732.1 [ (a) ], graded as a Felony of the Third Degree; one count of Accident[s] Involving Death or Personal Injury under 75 [Pa.C.S.] § 3742 [ (a) ], graded as a Felony of the Third Degree; two counts of Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ], graded as Felony of the Third Degree; two counts of Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ], graded as Misdemeanors of the Second Degree; one count of Simple Assault-Attempt or Cause Bodily Injury to Child, under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 2701 [ (a)(1) ], graded as a Misdemeanor [of the] First Degree; one count of Recklessly Endangering Another Person [ (REAP) ] under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 2705 [,] graded as a Misdemeanor [of the] Second Degree; one count of Accident[s] Involving Damage Attended Vehicle/Property under 75 [Pa.C.S.] § 3743 [ (a) ], graded as a Misdemeanor [of the] Third Degree; and Possessi[ng] Instrument[s] of Crime under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 907 [ (a) ], graded as a Misdemeanor of the First Degree.

As the presiding trial judge, this [c]ourt directed the completion of Presentence Evaluations and Mental Health Evaluations by the First Judicial District Probation and Parole and Mental Health Departments, and scheduled the sentencing hearing in due course. After conducting a thorough review of all completed presentence and mental health evaluations, victim impact statements, and correspondence submitted on behalf of Appellant[,] and considering all relevant data and live testimony submitted at a full and fair sentencing hearing, this [c]ourt imposed the following sentences:

Count 1: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ]-Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property, M2: Minimum six (6) months['] supervised term of confinement to maximum twelve (12) months['] confinement, to run consecutively to Count 9;

Count 2: 75 [Pa.C.S.] § 3742 [ (a) ]-Accident[s] Involving Death or Personal Injury, F3: A determination of guilty with no further penalty;

Count 3: 75 [Pa.C.S.] § 3732.1 [ (a) ]-Aggravated Assault by Vehicle, F3: A determination of guilty with no further penalty;

Count 4: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 2705 -[REAP], M2: Minimum six (6) months['] supervised term of confinement to maximum twelve (12) months['] confinement, to run consecutively to Count 1; Count 5: [ 75 Pa.C.S. § 3743(a) ]-Accident[s] Involving Damage Attended Vehicle/Property, M3: A determination of guilty with no further penalty[;]

Count 6: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ]-Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property, M2: Minimum six (6) months['] supervised term of confinement to maximum twelve (12) months['] confinement, to run consecutively to Count 4;

Count 7: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ]-Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property, F3: Minimum six (6) months['] supervised term of confinement to maximum twelve (12) months['] confinement, to run consecutively to Count 6;

Count 8: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 3304 [ (a)(2) ]-Criminal Mischief-Tampering With Property, F3: Minimum six (6) months['] supervised term of confinement to maximum twelve (12) months['] confinement, to run consecutively to Count 7;

Count 9: 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 2702 [ (a)(1) ]-Aggravated Assault, F1 (Cause Serious Bodily Injury): Minimum seven (7) years and six (6) months of state supervised term of confinement to maximum twenty (20) years['] confinement;

Count 10: Simple Assault[, 18 Pa.C.S. § 2701(a)(1) ], M2-A determination of guilty with no further penalty[.]

The resulting aggregate sentence was a minimum period of ten (10) years to a maximum period of twenty-five (25) years of incarceration, with credit accorded for custodial time served. Appellant was ordered to have no contact with the Commonwealth witnesses. Rehabilitative conditions were imposed including participation in anger management classes, vocational training, employment, dual diagnosis evaluation and treatment, and drug and alcohol screening. Submission to random drug and alcohol testing and home visits were also imposed along with payment of regular fines and costs. Restitution was ordered in the amount of $3,724.00[,] based upon the reported aggregate insurance deductible payments submitted by each automobile owner. No restitution had been requested on behalf of the child that had been injured. [Appellant] was deemed "RRRI"^[2] and "Boot Camp" ineligible.

Trial Court Opinion (TCO), 10/16/2018, at 2-6.

Appellant filed a timely post-sentence motion, which was denied by the trial court on October 18, 2017. On November 17, 2017, Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Subsequently, on January 22, 2018, the trial court ordered Appellant to file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of errors complained of on appeal "within [21] days...