Commonwealth v. Griffin

1

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ARTHUR LEE GRIFFIN, JR. Appellant

No. 1620 MDA 2021

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

January 26, 2023

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered July 1, 2021 In the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-31-CR-0000264-2019.

BEFORE: DUBOW, J., McLAUGHLIN, J., and COLINS J.^[*]

MEMORANDUM

COLINS, J.:

Appellant Arthur Lee Griffin, Jr., appeals from the judgments of sentence imposed after a jury found him guilty of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (PWID), conspiracy to commit possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, dealing in proceeds of unlawful activities, corrupt organizations - conducting or participating in a pattern of racketeering activity, corrupt organizations - conspiracy with others to conduct or participate in a pattern of racketeering activity, and criminal use of a communication facility.^[1] He challenges the adequacy of his waiver of his right to counsel, the denial of his claim alleging a constitutional violation of his right to a speedy trial, the legality and discretionary aspects of his sentence, and the weight and sufficiency of the evidence. Upon careful review, we vacate the judgments of sentence and remand for a new trial.

The trial court offers the following summary of the facts in this case:

From approximately December of 2016 through January of 2018[ Appellant] was the head of a drug trafficking enterprise that originated in Pittsburgh and targeted Huntingdon County as its marketplace. The enterprise purchased heroin (including fentanyl sold as heroin), crack cocaine, and cocaine powder from unknown suppliers in Pittsburgh. The drugs were then transported to Huntingdon County and either sold directly or further processed and packaged for sale. The principal members of the enterprise were [Appellant], his then-girlfriend (now wife) Shantel Johnson, and [Appellant's] friend Jemiere Hickman. [Appellant] was the head of the enterprise, with Shantel as his second-in-command.

The enterprise began just with [Appellant] and Shantel. The pair made contact with [the] local drug community in and around the borough of Mount Union in Huntingdon County. Moving quickly, the two established themselves as having a steady supply of product. They started by selling directly to users and small-time dealers (who were often addicts themselves), then expanded to having others deal for them. This was typically done under an arrangement whereby the dealers would be "fronted" drugs, meaning payment was due once the drugs had been sold or used. "Fronting" drugs allowed [Appellant] and Shantel to trap the dealers in a cycle of debt, as they always needed to sell more drugs to pay off what they owed and to feed their habit. It also meant the dealers were always trying to expand their sales, to [Appellant]'s benefit.

We note that Appellant identified the order denying his post-sentence motion as the order he wished to appeal in his notice of appeal. However, "[i]n a criminal action, appeal properly lies from the judgment of sentence made final by the denial of post-sentence motions." See Commonwealth v. Shamberger, 788 A.2d 408, 410 n.2 (Pa. Super. 2001) (en banc), appeal denied, 800 A.2d 932 (Pa. 2002). We have corrected the caption accordingly.

From the very beginning, [Appellant] and Shantel took steps to avoid detection. [Appellant] was usually known as "Mack," and Shantel was usually known as "China," though sometimes "Miss T" or "Tell." The two also went by "Romeo" and "Juliet." Instead of getting an apartment, they began by staying at the homes of drug dealers and users they had met. They would also stay in hotels around Huntingdon Borough. The pair rarely stayed in one place for more than a night or two, and they would often split up. They broke up their time in Huntingdon County with trips back to Pittsburgh to obtain more drugs, or "re-up."

The enterprise grew large enough that [Appellant] and Shantel needed help running it. In the March/April 2017 timeframe they recruited Jemiere Hickman to join them. Hickman and [Appellant] had gotten to know each other when they were both incarcerated at SCI-Forest, and [Appellant] got in touch with Hickman after he was released in February 2017. Hickman, who went by "Head" or "Head Shot," effectively became middle management for the enterprise.

Instead of conducting drug transactions himself, [Appellant] would make the necessary arrangements via cell phone, using calls and text messages, and then have Shantel or Hickman conduct the meet and make the exchange of drugs and money. Hickman personally supervised the operations of the local dealers, making sure they did not use the entirety of the supply they had been given before selling it, and making sure that their money was right.

In time, [Appellant] stopped coming to Huntingdon County entirely. He shifted to staying in hotels outside of Huntingdon County (such as in Altoona) and having users and dealers come out to meet him or Shantel at a public location such as a large store or gas station. He then began staying in the Pittsburgh area exclusively, having some of the Huntingdon County dealers come out to meet him or Shantel when it was time to re-up. For the significant number of deals that still occurred in Huntingdon County, [Appellant] limited himself to coordinating and approving deals via phone calls and text messages. Shantel became the regular point of contact for those customers who had previously dealt with [Appellant] directly, making trips to the Huntingdon County area to make sales and collect payments on a regular basis. The pattern continued, with the enterprise's sales continuing to expand, until late September/early October 2017.

The first location [Appellant] and Shantel had worked from was the residence of Jesse Hamman in the Valley View Mobile Home Park in Shirley Township, Huntingdon County. Unbeknownst to [Appellant] and Shantel, the start of their enterprise coincided with the start of an investigation by Pennsylvania State Police Trooper Andrew Corl into drug activity at that location (Hamman was a well-known local dealer who had already drawn attention to himself). As [Appellant] and Shantel began expanding their activities, Trooper Corl began getting surveillance pictures of them via a remote camera located across the street from Hamman's mobile home. He was able to conduct a controlled buy from [Appellant] in April 2017 using a confidential informant (a "CI"). Trooper Corl was also able to coordinate a traffic stop of Shantel and [Appellant] in May 2017 in an attempt to learn their true identities. The trooper who made the stop was able to positively identify Shantel, but was thwarted by [Appellant]. [Appellant] provided the trooper with the name, birth date, and social security number of Pierre Trent, [Appellant]'s brother. [Appellant]'s physical characteristics (height, weight, age, etc.) were close enough to Trent's that the trooper believed the information was accurate, and the investigation proceeded under the assumption that Trent, not [Appellant], was "Mack."

In late September 2017[,] a search warrant was executed at the apartment of Ashley Shade and her boyfriend, Shane Hollibaugh. Ashley and Shane had been dealing heroin for [Appellant], and had been making regular trips to Pittsburgh over the summer to re-up, bringing back large quantities each time. The search warrant provided a key piece of evidence for Trooper Corl, in the form of a written log (an "owe sheet") that Ashley had kept showing Shane's drug activity with [Appellant] for that month (i.e., how much, in term of dollar value, [Appellant] had fronted to Shane, and how much Shane still owed [Appellant], including transaction dates). The owe sheet also revealed something that Trooper Corl had not yet known - [Appellant's enterprise was not the only one operating in Huntingdon County at that time. Not only had Ashley and Shane been dealing heroin for [Appellant], but they had also been dealing crack and heroin for Marcus Womack, an individual with ties to the Philadelphia area. A second search warrant was executed in early October 2017 at a location dealing with heroin and crack. The evidence from both search warrants was significant, and included cell phones from which PSP forensic technicians were able to recover text messages and call data.

The arrests of Ashley, Shane, and others made a large dent in the enterprise's sales. However, it continued to be active, with Hickman running the local operations, Shantel acting as the go-between, and [Appellant] continuing to run the show and coordinate deals from Pittsburgh. The event that really put a damper on the enterprise's activities was [Appellant]'s arrest in Pittsburgh on January 24, 2018. [Appellant] was a parole absconder, having been released early on parole on June 20, 2016, from a sentence of 5-10 years' incarceration on a conviction for Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited, 18 Pa. C.S. § 6105(a)(1), and then fled from a halfway house in August 2016. See CP-02-CR-0005095-2008. His arrest in Pittsburgh arose from the resulting warrant.

In the meantime, the investigation into [Appellant]'s enterprise began to heat up. Up until October 2017 it had been overseen by Huntingdon County District Attorney David Smith. With the knowledge that not one, but two, drug trafficking enterprises had been operating in Huntingdon County, DA Smith reached out to the Office of the Attorney General for assistance via the Commonwealth Attorneys Act, 71 P.S. §§ 732-101, et seq.

Deputy Attorney General David C. Gorman was assigned to the matter and took the lead on it. Armed with the evidence from the search

...