Com. v. Albright, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Com. v. Albright, D.

DecidedFebruary 14, 2017

DocketCom. v. Albright, D. No. 360 MDA 2016

StatusUnpublished

This text of Com. v. Albright, D. (Com. v. Albright, D.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Com. v. Albright, D., (Pa. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

J-A30018-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee

v.

DAVID L. ALBRIGHT JR.,

Appellant No. 360 MDA 2016

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of October 14, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-22-CR-0003573-2014

BEFORE: BOWES, OLSON and STABILE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY OLSON, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 14, 2017

Appellant, David L. Albright, Jr., appeals from the judgment of

sentence entered on October 14, 2015, as made final by the denial of

Appellant’s post-sentence motion on February 4, 2016. We affirm.

The trial court provided us with an able and well-written summary of

the underlying facts of this case. As the trial court explained:

[Appellant] was originally charged with aggravated assault, criminal solicitation to commit aggravated assault, terroristic threats, ethnic intimidation, stalking, simple assault, recklessly endangering another person, disorderly conduct[,] and public drunkenness for an incident that occurred in June 2014. The aggravated assault charge was dropped, and [the trial] court dismissed the stalking and recklessly endangering another person charges. A [jury] trial was held [in August] 2015 [and, during this trial, the following evidence was presented]. . . .

From 2007 to December 2013, [Appellant] was employed by Vistar[,] where he was supervised by [K.L.] J-A30018-16

[Appellant] was terminated in December 2013 following a dispute with another employee and in March of 2014 [Appellant] made a few unsuccessful attempts via text message to [K.L.] to get his job back. At some point, [K.L.] received notice that [Appellant] may have a weapon [and] intended to harm him.

In June of 2014, [K.L.] was at his home late [Father’s Day] night with his fiancée and son. At approximately 9:00 p.m.[, K.L.] heard pounding on his front door. As he approached the door, he turned on the light and saw the person at the door move off to the side of the door, but continue knocking with the back of his fist. [K.L.] then went to the front door and saw [Appellant] there. [Appellant] indicated he was there to discuss the job he had lost, but [K.L.] said “David, I have nothing to say to you. Just leave.” [Appellant] demanded that [K.L.] come out and talk to him man to man but [K.L.] refused as he was afraid [Appellant] had a weapon and was there to hurt him. [Appellant] did not attempt to break into the apartment or enter it. . . .

After [K.L.] told [Appellant] several times to leave, [Appellant] said “that was seven years of my life” in reference to his time at Vistar. [K.L.] replied “you dug your own grave over at work.” [Appellant] then replied “what about your grave[, K.L.], let’s talk about your grave.” [K.L.] interpreted this as a threat and told his fiancée to call the police. Ultimately, [K.L.] himself called the police and [Appellant] left. [K.L.] believe[d Appellant] must have heard him on the phone with the police.

Officer Wade Bloom arrived at [K.L.’s] apartment to speak to [K.L.]. He left the house to try to find [Appellant], but was unable to do so and returned. He then received a call from the dispatcher that there was a man a couple of blocks away at a different apartment building “wielding a knife and causing a disturbance.”

At Willow Garden apartments, Dwayne Davis was sitting in the courtyard outside of his apartment [with] his fiancée and their friend. Davis noticed [Appellant] approaching straight toward their group. [Appellant] introduced himself, asked if he could sit down and engaged in small talk. After

-2- J-A30018-16

a bit of talk, [Appellant] told the group he was “on a mission to kill” and when asked who, he replied “my boss.” [Appellant] then pulled a knife out of his pants, and asked Davis if he would do it. [Davis] took this seriously and believed that [Appellant] had just asked him to use the knife to kill his boss. Apparently not everyone at the table heard this comment. Davis said no and then walked over to his neighbor, Tracey Strickland, to ask her to call the police because he thought they needed to be involved. Tracey called the police and Officer Bloom arrived.

Officer Bloom drew his weapon and slowly entered the courtyard as he was uncertain of the suspect’s location. Davis pointed Bloom toward [Appellant] and Bloom approached with his firearm drawn[. He] identified [Appellant] and aimed his gun. Officer Bloom ordered [Appellant] to drop to his knees and asked where the weapon was. [Appellant] refused to drop to his knees and denied having a weapon. Bloom got closer, holstered his firearm and switched to his [TASER]. [Appellant] then cooperated by dropping to his knees, though he still denied having a knife. Bloom handcuffed [Appellant] and then found the knife approximately [six to eight] feet away.

Trial Court Opinion, 2/4/16, at 1-4 (internal citations omitted) (some internal

capitalization omitted).

The jury found Appellant guilty of criminal solicitation to commit

aggravated assault, terroristic threats, and disorderly conduct1 and, on

October 14, 2015, the trial court sentenced Appellant to serve an aggregate

term of six-and-a-half to 13 years in prison for his convictions.

____________________________________________

1 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 902, 2706(a)(1), and 5503(a)(4), respectively.

-3- J-A30018-16

The trial court denied Appellant’s post-sentence motion on February 4,

2016 and Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant raises three

claims on appeal:

[1.] Was not the evidence insufficient to establish the offense of solicitation to commit aggravated assault when the Commonwealth did not prove that [Appellant] requested another person to “engage in specific conduct” within the meaning of 18 [Pa.C.S.A.] § 902?

[2.] Did not the [trial] court err in overruling [Appellant’s] objection to the admission of certain out-of-court statements during the testimony of the complainant when such statements constituted hearsay not subject to any exception and when there was no relevant non-hearsay basis for their admission?

[3.] Did not the [trial] court err in denying [Appellant’s] objection to presentation of anti-character evidence during rebuttal from a professional investigative witness hired by the corporate employer of the complainant when [Appellant] did not open the door to such evidence and when such evidence exceeded the bounds of proper anti-character evidence under Pa.R.E. 404(a)(2)(A) and 405?

Appellant’s Brief at 6 (some internal capitalization omitted).

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the relevant law, the

certified record, the notes of testimony, and the opinions of the able trial

court judge, the Honorable Deborah E. Curcillo. We conclude that there has

been no error in this case and that Judge Curcillo’s opinions, entered on

February 4, 2016 and April 18, 2016, meticulously and accurately dispose of

Appellant’s issues on appeal. Therefore, we affirm on the basis of Judge

Curcillo’s opinions and adopt them as our own. In any future filings with this

-4- J-A30018-16

or any other court addressing this ruling, the filing party shall attach a copy

of the trial court opinions with the victim’s name redacted.

Judgment of sentence affirmed. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Bowes, J. joins this memorandum.

Stabile, J. concurs in the result.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 2/14/2017

-5- Circulated 01/17/2017 02:30 PM

APR 19 2016 C.OMM.ONWEt\.L TH OF PENNSYLV A.NIA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, : DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANlJ\

v.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI