Com. v. Caldwell, C.
Opinion
J-S36014-25
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA :
v. :
: :
CAMERIN CALDWELL :
:
Appellant : No. 1595 WDA 2024
Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered December 9, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0009797-2019
BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J.E., NICHOLS, J., and FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.*
MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, P.J.E.: FILED: November 20, 2025
Camerin Caldwell appeals pro se from the order entered on December
9, 2024, dismissing his petition filed pursuant to the Post-Conviction Relief Act
(“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. Caldwell argues the PCRA court erred
in dismissing his petition without a hearing and finding his counsel did not
render ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.
After being initially charged with first-degree murder and related
charges, Caldwell pled guilty to reduced charges upon the following facts as
set forth by the Commonwealth during the guilty plea hearing:
Had the Commonwealth proceeded to trial in this matter, the Commonwealth would have called detectives and officers from the Pittsburgh Police Department as well as civilian witnesses and medical professionals who would have testified to the following.
____________________________________________
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S36014-25
On or about Thursday, July 4th of 2019, at approximately 11:03 p.m., Zone 2 officers were dispatched to a shots-fired call in the 700 block of Penn Avenue in downtown Pittsburgh. Multiple officers responded to the area as there were thousands of people in downtown Pittsburgh that night at that time celebrating the Fourth of July and watching the fireworks display.
On arrival, officers found two males shot inside the open area known as the Agnes Katz Plaza located on Penn Avenue in downtown Pittsburgh. Kenneth Green, an 18-year-old male, was found shot approximately six times in his upper and lower body. Keyari[] Wynn, [] a 16-year-old male, was found with one gunshot to the head. Both victims were rushed to the hospital from the scene.
The scene was processed by Pittsburgh Police crime scene unit and detectives. Among the evidence collected included eight 9- millimeter shell casings recovered from the scene. Additionally, a firearm, a 9-millimeter Taurus pistol, Model G2C, with Serial Number TMC81749 was recovered from a dumpster in the northwest corner of the plaza. The weapon was not loaded and the magazine was empty when recovered.
In addition, detectives from the Mobile Crime Unit would testify that multiple surveillance videos were obtained from near the crime scene and surrounding area. Through the course of the investigation into the incident detectives learned, and they would testify along with the thousands of civilians downtown on the Fourth of July to celebrate, video surveillance captured two groups of actors in a physical altercation inside of Point State Park near the end of the fireworks display. The surveillance videos show that the group separated at some point and walked separately into the city before ultimately meeting back up with each other at the Agnes Katz Plaza where the shooting occurred at approximately 11:00 p.m.
Video surveillance would show that when the two groups came together in the plaza, a verbal altercation begins among several individuals. Some begin to physically fight each other. At approximately 11:02, a male wearing a white tank top and jean shorts is observed having a gun out in his hand and begins firing. This individual was identified as the defendant, Camerin Caldwell, from the video evidence by his stepfather, Antonio Wynn, and his mother, Rayshonna Caldwell[].
J-S36014-25
Once the defendant begins firing the gun, Keyari Wynn, the defendant’s stepbrother, is observed to fall to the ground, and Kenneth Green is seen attempting to run prior to collapsing where police find him on their arrival. The defendant is then observed to run from the plaza past the dumpster with a firearm visible in his hand and is seen throwing the firearm into the dumpster where it was later recovered. At no time does the defendant stop to render aid.
Scientist Thomas Morgan from the Allegheny County Office of the Medical Examiner would testify that he performs an examination on the ballistics evidence in this case and documented same at report number 19 LAB 05264. Scientist Morgan would testify that he examined the 9-millimeter Taurus pistol recovered on scene from the dumpster. He would testify that the firearm was test- fired and found to be operable and to have a barrel length of less than 15 inches. He would also testify that he examined the eight spent 9-millimeter cartridge casings recovered on scene, and he would confirm that his examination revealed that all eight casings were discharged from the Taurus firearm he examined. The evidence would show that this firearm recovered and used in this instance was registered to a stepbrother of the defendant, Keanu Wynn [].
Victim Kenneth Green, who was shot multiple times in the upper and lower extremities and body, would testify that it was the defendant, Camerin Caldwell, who shot him that day. Kenneth Green would testify that the two groups of males that day fighting belonged to two different gangs, AFN and Choppa Boys. Green would explain that these are rival gangs that were releasing YouTube message videos against each other at the time. They had originally fought in Point State Park earlier that night, but each had gone their separate ways until they ran into each other again at Katz Plaza. Green would testify that he knows the defendant Caldwell because they used to be friends and hung out in ninth grade together. They eventually grew apart as they began to hang out with different people.
On the night in question, Caldwell and Green got into a fistfight. Green lost track of Caldwell and was standing there watching the others engaged and then saw Camerin Caldwell with a gun in his hand and saw Caldwell start firing.
J-S36014-25
The Commonwealth would have presented evidence at trial that the defendant was 18 years old at the time of this incident and did not have a valid license to carry a concealed weapon. Additionally, the defendant was a person prohibited from possessing a firearm as a result of an F1 robbery conviction at Juvenile Case Number 201702191 with a disposition date of 4/19/19.
Through the course of the trial, the Commonwealth would have presented medical records to support the charges. The medical records would have established that Kenneth Green suffered six bullet wounds to his body. He required multiple surgeries and still has at least one bullet lodged in his stomach. He suffered severe damage to his colon and kidneys which require ongoing treatment and his injuries resulted in the amputation of his left leg above the knee.
The medical records from Keyari Wynn would show that he suffered a debilitating gunshot wound to his head on July 4th, 2019. As a result of his injuries, Kyari was left with permanent brain damage requiring constant care. He remained nonverbal and required a ventilator and feeding tube until he eventually succumbed to his injuries related to this incident and died on or about May 14th, 2021.
Dr. Todd Luckasevic, medical examiner at the Allegheny County Office of the Medical Examiner, would testify that he performed an autopsy on Keyari Wynn at Case Number 21 COR 04220. He would testify that his autopsy showed that as a result of the gunshot wound to the head from the July 4th, 2019 incident, the bullet lacerated the skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscle of the scalp, fractured the skill and lacerated the brain. His opinion would be that Keyari Wynn died as a result of complications from a penetrating gunshot wound to the head and that his manner of death was homicide, and with that, the Commonwealth would rest, Your Honor.
N.T. Guilty Plea Hearing, 3/10/22, at 10-16.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
J-S36014-25
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA :
v. :
: :
CAMERIN CALDWELL :
:
Appellant : No. 1595 WDA 2024
Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered December 9, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0009797-2019
BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J.E., NICHOLS, J., and FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.*
MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, P.J.E.: FILED: November 20, 2025
Camerin Caldwell appeals pro se from the order entered on December
9, 2024, dismissing his petition filed pursuant to the Post-Conviction Relief Act
(“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. Caldwell argues the PCRA court erred
in dismissing his petition without a hearing and finding his counsel did not
render ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.
After being initially charged with first-degree murder and related
charges, Caldwell pled guilty to reduced charges upon the following facts as
set forth by the Commonwealth during the guilty plea hearing:
Had the Commonwealth proceeded to trial in this matter, the Commonwealth would have called detectives and officers from the Pittsburgh Police Department as well as civilian witnesses and medical professionals who would have testified to the following.
____________________________________________
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S36014-25
On or about Thursday, July 4th of 2019, at approximately 11:03 p.m., Zone 2 officers were dispatched to a shots-fired call in the 700 block of Penn Avenue in downtown Pittsburgh. Multiple officers responded to the area as there were thousands of people in downtown Pittsburgh that night at that time celebrating the Fourth of July and watching the fireworks display.
On arrival, officers found two males shot inside the open area known as the Agnes Katz Plaza located on Penn Avenue in downtown Pittsburgh. Kenneth Green, an 18-year-old male, was found shot approximately six times in his upper and lower body. Keyari[] Wynn, [] a 16-year-old male, was found with one gunshot to the head. Both victims were rushed to the hospital from the scene.
The scene was processed by Pittsburgh Police crime scene unit and detectives. Among the evidence collected included eight 9- millimeter shell casings recovered from the scene. Additionally, a firearm, a 9-millimeter Taurus pistol, Model G2C, with Serial Number TMC81749 was recovered from a dumpster in the northwest corner of the plaza. The weapon was not loaded and the magazine was empty when recovered.
In addition, detectives from the Mobile Crime Unit would testify that multiple surveillance videos were obtained from near the crime scene and surrounding area. Through the course of the investigation into the incident detectives learned, and they would testify along with the thousands of civilians downtown on the Fourth of July to celebrate, video surveillance captured two groups of actors in a physical altercation inside of Point State Park near the end of the fireworks display. The surveillance videos show that the group separated at some point and walked separately into the city before ultimately meeting back up with each other at the Agnes Katz Plaza where the shooting occurred at approximately 11:00 p.m.
Video surveillance would show that when the two groups came together in the plaza, a verbal altercation begins among several individuals. Some begin to physically fight each other. At approximately 11:02, a male wearing a white tank top and jean shorts is observed having a gun out in his hand and begins firing. This individual was identified as the defendant, Camerin Caldwell, from the video evidence by his stepfather, Antonio Wynn, and his mother, Rayshonna Caldwell[].
J-S36014-25
Once the defendant begins firing the gun, Keyari Wynn, the defendant’s stepbrother, is observed to fall to the ground, and Kenneth Green is seen attempting to run prior to collapsing where police find him on their arrival. The defendant is then observed to run from the plaza past the dumpster with a firearm visible in his hand and is seen throwing the firearm into the dumpster where it was later recovered. At no time does the defendant stop to render aid.
Scientist Thomas Morgan from the Allegheny County Office of the Medical Examiner would testify that he performs an examination on the ballistics evidence in this case and documented same at report number 19 LAB 05264. Scientist Morgan would testify that he examined the 9-millimeter Taurus pistol recovered on scene from the dumpster. He would testify that the firearm was test- fired and found to be operable and to have a barrel length of less than 15 inches. He would also testify that he examined the eight spent 9-millimeter cartridge casings recovered on scene, and he would confirm that his examination revealed that all eight casings were discharged from the Taurus firearm he examined. The evidence would show that this firearm recovered and used in this instance was registered to a stepbrother of the defendant, Keanu Wynn [].
Victim Kenneth Green, who was shot multiple times in the upper and lower extremities and body, would testify that it was the defendant, Camerin Caldwell, who shot him that day. Kenneth Green would testify that the two groups of males that day fighting belonged to two different gangs, AFN and Choppa Boys. Green would explain that these are rival gangs that were releasing YouTube message videos against each other at the time. They had originally fought in Point State Park earlier that night, but each had gone their separate ways until they ran into each other again at Katz Plaza. Green would testify that he knows the defendant Caldwell because they used to be friends and hung out in ninth grade together. They eventually grew apart as they began to hang out with different people.
On the night in question, Caldwell and Green got into a fistfight. Green lost track of Caldwell and was standing there watching the others engaged and then saw Camerin Caldwell with a gun in his hand and saw Caldwell start firing.
J-S36014-25
The Commonwealth would have presented evidence at trial that the defendant was 18 years old at the time of this incident and did not have a valid license to carry a concealed weapon. Additionally, the defendant was a person prohibited from possessing a firearm as a result of an F1 robbery conviction at Juvenile Case Number 201702191 with a disposition date of 4/19/19.
Through the course of the trial, the Commonwealth would have presented medical records to support the charges. The medical records would have established that Kenneth Green suffered six bullet wounds to his body. He required multiple surgeries and still has at least one bullet lodged in his stomach. He suffered severe damage to his colon and kidneys which require ongoing treatment and his injuries resulted in the amputation of his left leg above the knee.
The medical records from Keyari Wynn would show that he suffered a debilitating gunshot wound to his head on July 4th, 2019. As a result of his injuries, Kyari was left with permanent brain damage requiring constant care. He remained nonverbal and required a ventilator and feeding tube until he eventually succumbed to his injuries related to this incident and died on or about May 14th, 2021.
Dr. Todd Luckasevic, medical examiner at the Allegheny County Office of the Medical Examiner, would testify that he performed an autopsy on Keyari Wynn at Case Number 21 COR 04220. He would testify that his autopsy showed that as a result of the gunshot wound to the head from the July 4th, 2019 incident, the bullet lacerated the skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscle of the scalp, fractured the skill and lacerated the brain. His opinion would be that Keyari Wynn died as a result of complications from a penetrating gunshot wound to the head and that his manner of death was homicide, and with that, the Commonwealth would rest, Your Honor.
N.T. Guilty Plea Hearing, 3/10/22, at 10-16.
The PCRA court set forth the relevant procedural history:
[Caldwell] pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, on March 10, 2022 to the following charges: third degree murder, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2502(c); aggravated assault—serious bodily injury, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2702(a)(1)[;] firearms not to be carried without a
J-S36014-25
license, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106(a)(1); and possession of a firearm prohibited, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6105(a)(1). On June 23, 2022, [Caldwell] was sentenced to serve a period of incarceration of not less than one hundred and eighty six (186) months nor more than three hundred and seventy two (372) months, followed by a consecutive period of incarceration of not less than seventy-eight (78) nor more than one hundred and fifty-six (156) months, for a total aggregate sentence of twenty-two (22) years to forty-four (44) years [of] imprisonment. The court noted that [Caldwell] is not RRRI eligible.
No post-sentence motions or direct appeal were filed.
On June 5, 2023, [Caldwell] filed a pro se petition under the [PCRA]. Counsel was appointed to represent [Caldwell]. On October 10, 2023, after a thorough review of the pleadings and transcripts, along with legal research of possible issues and correspondence with [Caldwell], counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a “no merit” letter [pursuant to Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) and Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (en banc)]. On November 13, 2023, the court granted the motion to withdraw and issued a notice of intent to dismiss, which provided [Caldwell] with twenty (20) days to respond. As no response was forthcoming, the petition was dismissed via order dated December 21, 2023, which was served on [Caldwell] by certified mail.
On January 26, 2024, [Caldwell] filed a notice of appeal. In a pro se “Application for Relief,” [Caldwell] claimed he did not receive a copy of the notice of intent to dismiss. This resulted in the Superior Court issuing an order on August 2, 2024 vacating the order dismissing the PCRA petition and remanding the matter to [the PCRA court] with a direction to serve [Caldwell] with the notice of intention to dismiss.
Pursuant to said order from the Superior Court, the [PCRA court] issued an order on August 15, 2024 attaching a copy of the November 13, 2023 notice of intention to dismiss and a copy of the court’s 1925(a) opinion, with a provision allowing [Caldwell] to file a response within twenty (20) days. After reviewing [Caldwell’s] response, the court issued an order on December 9, 2024 again dismissing [Caldwell’s] PCRA petition, which was served on him by certified mail.
J-S36014-25
On December 30, 2024, [Caldwell] filed a pro se notice of appeal.
PCRA Court Opinion, 1/9/25, at 1-2 (unnecessary capitalization and italics
omitted).
The PCRA court did not order Caldwell to file a Rule 1925(b) statement
after he filed the December 30, 2024 notice of appeal.1 See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b).
The PCRA court authored a Rule 1925(a) opinion on January 9, 2025,
providing brief explanations in support of its ruling and incorporating its prior
Rule 1925(a) opinion dated May 1, 2024. See PCRA Court Opinion, 1/9/25, at
2-3; Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a).
Caldwell’s brief does not conform to our Rules. He does not include the
order or other determination in question, a statement of questions involved,
statement of the case, or summary of the argument. See Pa.R.A.P. 2111(a).
Caldwell includes a section labeled “Proffered Factual Argument” that seems
to include both a case statement and his argument on appeal. See Appellant’s
Brief, Proffered Factual Argument, at 1-6 (pagination provided).
We are cognizant that Appellant is pro se, however, this Court will not act as counsel and will not develop arguments on behalf of an appellant. It is an appellant’s duty to present arguments that are sufficiently developed for our review. The brief must support the claims with pertinent discussion, with references to the record and with citations to legal authorities. As such, when issues are not properly raised and developed in briefs, when the briefs are wholly inadequate to present specific issues for review, a court will not consider the merits thereof. Although this Court is willing to construe liberally materials filed by a pro se litigant, a pro se
____________________________________________
1 The PCRA court did order Caldwell to file a Rule 1925(b) statement after the
January 26, 2024 notice of appeal and Caldwell complied with that order.
J-S36014-25
appellant enjoys no special benefit. Any layperson choosing to represent himself in a legal proceeding must, to some reasonable extent, assume the risk that his lack of expertise and legal training will prove his undoing.
Commonwealth v. Westlake, 295 A.3d 1281, 1286 n.8 (Pa. Super. 2023)
(brackets, quotation marks, italics, and citations omitted).
Here, because we are able to decipher two claims from Caldwell’s
deficient brief, we will not quash the appeal. Any other potential issues we
deem waived as they are not properly developed. See id. The two reviewable
arguments are: (1) the denial of an evidentiary hearing; and (2) ineffective
assistance of counsel in connection with his guilty plea.
We will address Caldwell’s second issue first as that will determine
whether his first issue has merit. Caldwell asserts “counsel was in fact
ineffective, and that the sole reason that [Caldwell] entered into any deal was
based on what his counsel told him, what the prosecutor offered in exchange
for his plea.” Appellant’s Brief, Proffered Factual Argument, at 2 (pagination
provided). Caldwell does not explain what his counsel told him or what he
believes the prosecutor offered for his plea of guilty. Caldwell seems to believe
there was more to his plea agreement than a reduction of charges. See id.
Caldwell argues an evidentiary hearing was necessary “to determine what was
actually part of the bargain to [Caldwell] by his counsel.” Id. at 5 (pagination
provided).
After a thorough review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the
applicable law, and the thorough opinion filed by the Honorable Susan
J-S36014-25
Evashavik DiLucente dated May 1, 2024, we conclude the PCRA court did not
err in finding Caldwell’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel meritless.
See PCRA Court Opinion, 5/1/24, at 11-15 (noting Caldwell is bound by the
statements he made at his guilty plea hearing and he cannot challenge his
plea by asserting he lied under oath, Caldwell acknowledged at the hearing
that there was no agreement as to the sentence to be imposed and nothing
else was promised him in exchange for his plea of guilty, and finding Caldwell’s
plea was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered).
In his final claim, Caldwell asserts the PCRA court should have held an
evidentiary hearing so he “could present factual proof[.]” Appellant’s Brief,
Proffered Factual Argument, at 2 (pagination provided). This claim has no
merit.
“A PCRA hearing is not a matter of right, and the PCRA court may decline
to hold a hearing if there is no genuine issue concerning any material fact and
the defendant is not entitled to relief as a matter of law.” Commonwealth v.
Morrison, 878 A.2d 102, 109 (Pa. Super. 2005) (en banc) (citation omitted).
“We stress that an evidentiary hearing is not meant to function as a fishing
expedition for any possible evidence that may support some speculative claim
of ineffectiveness.” Commonwealth v. Roney, 79 A.3d 595, 605 (Pa. 2013)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
As the PCRA court aptly found, there is no genuine issue concerning any
material fact and Caldwell is not entitled to relief as a matter of law. His only
J-S36014-25
claim for relief would contradict the statements he made at his guilty plea
hearing. “Appellant is bound by his statements made during the colloquy.”
Commonwealth v. Reid, 117 A.3d 777, 783 (Pa. Super. 2015) (citation
omitted). The only agreement between Caldwell and the Commonwealth was
a reduction in the charges against him. The Commonwealth amended the
charge of first-degree murder to third-degree murder, withdrew counts 2, 3,
7, and 8, and amended one count of aggravated assault from aggravated
assault with a deadly weapon to aggravated assault causing serious bodily
injury. See N.T. Guilty Plea Hearing, 3/10/22, at 2-3. Caldwell cannot now
claim he lied under oath in an attempt to withdraw his knowing, voluntary,
and intelligent guilty plea.
Finding no error in the PCRA court’s order, we affirm.
Order affirmed.
11/20/2025
Circulated 10/29/2025 Circulated 10/29/2025 02:08 02:08 PM
PM
IN N THE COURT COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
OF COMMON OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA
COMMONWEALTH COMMONWEALTH OF OF PENNSYLVANIA
PENNSYLVANIA DIVISION CRIMINAL DIVISION
vs. VS. CP-02-CR-0009797-2019 CP-02-CR-0009797-2019
[Pa. Super. [Pa. Super. Ct.
Ct. # 184
WDA 2024]
2024]
CAMERIN CALDWELL, CALDWELL,
Defendant Defendant
OPINION AND ORDER
ORDER TO
TO TRANSMIT
TRANSMIT RECORD TO
TO APPELLATE COURT
COURT
The Court Court submits
submits this Opinion and Order Order to
to Transmit
Transmit Record to
to Appellate
Appellate
Court Court in n response to to Defendant
Defendant Camerin Caldwell's appeal appeal pending in
n the
the
Pennsylvania Superior Superior Court
Court at
at docket
docket number
number 184 WDA
184 WDA 2024.
2024. For
For the reasons
the reasons
that that follow, follow, the the December
December 21, 2023,
2023, Order
Order of
of Court
Court denying Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's
Caldwell's
"
i
.- r.2
•
:·
l
22
> -"
request request for for relief pursuant pursuant to
to the
the Post-Conviction Relief Relief Act
Act ("PCRA")
("PCRA") should^be
should'be
affirmed. affirmed. ^&22 S ·7 233 -..
77 CJ
o
I.I. Procedural Procedural Background 3 )
c
The Commonwealth Commonwealth charged Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell by criminal
criminal information
nformation with
with
eight eight counts counts of of criminal
criminal conduct.
conduct. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell appeared before this Court Court to
to
enter enter a negotiated guilty plea plea agreement
agreement to:
to: Count
Count 1 (which,
(which, as
as amended,
amended,
was was for for third third degree degree murder
murder for
for the death
death of
of Keyari
Keyari Wynn)
Wynn) - 18
8 Pa.
Pa. C.S.
C.S. §
2502(c), 2502(c), Count Count 4 (which, (which, as
as amended,
amended, was
was for
for aggravated assault
assault -- serious
bodily bodily injury)
injury) - 18 18 Pa.
Pa. C.S.
C.S. § 2702(a)(1),
2702(a)(l ), Count
Count 5 (carrying
(carrying aa firearm
firearm without
without a
license) license) --- 18 18 Pa.
Pa. C.S.
C.S. § 6106(a)(1),
6106(a)(l ), and Count
Count 6 (persons
(persons not
not to
to posses
posses a firearm)
firearm)
- 18 Pa. C.S.
18Pa. 55 6105(a)(1)
C.S. §§ 6105(0)(1) & & (c)(7).
(c)(7). Counts
Counts 2,
2, 3,
3, 7,
7, and 8 of
of the criminal
criminal
information were withdrawn by the information pursuant to the Commonwealth pursuant to the the parties'
parties’
plea plea agreement.
agreement.
Prior to entering his negotiated to entering negotiated guilty guilty plea, Mr. Caldwell plea, Mr. Caldwell completed a
document document titled titled “Guilty "Guilty Plea
Plea Explanation
Explanation Of
Of Defendant's Rights." Therein, Therein, Mr.
Mr.
Caldwell Caldwell affirmatively affirmatively answered and acknowledged that that he understood that
because he was was charged with more than one criminal criminal offense,
offense, "the
"the Court
Court may
may
impose a separate, separate, or or consecutive,
consecutive, sentence
sentence for
for each offensef.]"
offense[.]" See Guilty
Guilty
Plea Plea Explanation Of Of Defendant's
Defendant's Rights
Rights at
at 2,
2, Question 5.
5. He also
also answered and
acknowledged that that he had not
not been promised,
promised, even by his attorney, attorney, "anything
"anything
in in exchange for for [his]
[his] guilty plea
plea other
other than the
the terms
terms of
of [the]
[the] plea
plea bargain." Id.
bargain." Id,
at at 9, 9, Question 56.
56. In
n addition,
addition, during
during the
the guilty plea
plea proceedings,
proceedings, the
the following
following
occurred: occurred:
THE COURT:
COURT: Did
Did you complete a Guilty Plea/Explanation of
of Defendant's
Defendant's
Rights Rights form?
[MR. [MR. CALDWELL]:
CALDWELL]: Yes.
Yes.
THE COURT:
COURT: Did you complete this form form with the
advice and assistance
assistance of
of [your
[your
attorney]?
[MR. [MR. CALDWELL]:
CALDWELL]: Yes,
Yes, ma'am.
ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: And was
was he available to
to answer
answer any
questions questions you had while
while you were
completing this form?
[MR. [MR. CALDWELL]:
CALDWELL): Yes,
Yes, ma'am.
ma'am.
THE THE COURT:
COURT: Did you
you initial
initial this
this form
form at
at the
the bottom
bottom
of of each
each page?
page?
[MR, [MR. CALDWELL]:
CALDWELL]: Yes,
Yes, ma'am.
ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: Did you also Did also sign
sign the
the form
form at the
the
end?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. CALDWELL]: Yes,
Yes, ma’am.
ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: And in
n initialing
initialing at the
the bottom
bottom ofof
each page and signing the form at signing the form at
the the end, did you verify and affirm end, did affirm that you had read
read and understood
understood
each and every question?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: Also, that Also, that you answered
answered each and
every question
question truthfully
truthfully and
honestly?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: Iss this your your signature,
signature, sir?
sir?
[MR. CALDWELL]: Yes, [MR. CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: Did you sign Did sign this today?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. Yes, ma’am.
CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
THE COURT:
COURT: All right.
All right. I will
will incorporate
ncorporate this form
form
and your
your answers
answers into
into these
these
proceedings. proceedings .... ...
See Guilty Plea Transcript ("PT")
Plea Transcript ("PT") at 6-7 6-7..
Prior to to entering
entering his guilty
guilty plea,
plea, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell heard the
the Commonwealth
state state that that the the parties had “no
"no agreement
agreement as to
to sentence"
sentence" and that
that the
the
Commonwealth was Commonwealth was seeking seeking a deadly weapon sentencing sentencing enhancement.
enhancement. See
id. d, at at 3.
3. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell acknowledged
acknowledged the
the foregoing. Id. at
foregoing. ld, at 5.
5.
Finally, Finally, prior to to entering
entering his guilty
guilty plea,
plea, the
the Court
Court and Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell had the
the
following following exchange:
exchange:
THE COURT:
COURT: ... Mr.
Mr. Caldwell,
Caldwell, you've been
charged at at CC 9797 of of 201 20199 with
one count
count ofof criminal
criminal homicide in in
the third
third degree,
degree, the victim
victim being
Keyari Keyari Wynn
Wynn .... That
That is a felony ofof
the first degree and carries carries as
as a
potential potential sentence a period of period of
ncarceration in carceration of of up to to 20 to 40 years.
years.
You've been
been charged with one one count count ofof aggravated assault,assault, attempt attempt to to cause
cause serious
serious bodily
bodily
injury, injury, and that victim is Kenneth and that victim is Kenneth Green. Green. That
That isis aa felony
felony of of the
the first
first
degree andand the
the potential
potential penalty
penalty atat
that that count
count isi aa period
period ofof
incarceration of up to 10 incarceration of up to 1 O to to 20
20 years.
years.
You've You've been
been charged
charged withwith one
one
count count ofof carrying
carrying aa firearm
firearm without
without aa
license, license, which
which isi aa felony
felony ofof the
the third
third
degree. The potential penalty at degree. The potential penalty at that that count
count isi aa period
period of of
incarceration incarceration of of three three and
and aa half
half to
to
seven years. seven years.
Finally, Finally, you’ve
you've been
been charged
charged with
with
one count of persons not to possess one count of persons not to possess aa firearm,
firearm, which
which isis aa misdemeanor misdemeanor of of
the the first
first degree.
degree. TheThe potential
potential
penalty at that count isis two penalty at that count two and and half
half
to to five
five years.
years.
So So your
your total
total potential
potential penalty
penalty on
on all
all
of of these
these counts,
counts, ifif they
they were
were
imposed, imposed, thethe penalties penalties
consecutively would consecutively would be be aa period period of
of
incarceration incarceration of of upup to to 36
36 to
to 72
72 years.
years.
Did you discuss these Did these charges charges with
attorney]?
[your attorney]?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. Yes.
CALDWELL]: Yes.
THE COURT:
COURT: Are you fully fully and completely aware understand the
and understand the nature nature and
elements of each charge? elements charge?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. Yes, ma'am.
CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
THEE COU TH RT:
COURT: Do you fully
fully and
and completely
completely
understand the minimum understand the minimum andand maximum penalties that maximum penalties that you’re you're
facing today? facing today?
[MR. CALDWELL]: [MR. Yes. ma’am.
CALDWELL]: Yes, ma'am.
Id. d at 8-9 (emphasis (emphasis added).
added).
This Court Court ultimately
ultimately accepted Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's negotiated negotiated plea
plea
agreement. Id. at agreement. kl at 20. Sentencing was 20. Sentencing was deferred deferred pending
pending the
the preparation of a
presentence report.
report. Id. at 21..
On June June 23, 23, 2022,
2022, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell appeared before this Court Court for sentencing.
sentencing.
The The Court Court sentenced Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell to
to the
the following,
following, among
among other
other things:
things: at
Count Count 1, 1, 15.5 15.5 to to 31 years'
years' imprisonment,
mprisonment, at Count 4, 6.5 Count 4, 6.5 years
years to
to 13 years'
13 years'
incarceration, ncarceration, at Count 5, two to Count 5, to four
four years'
years' imprisonment,
mprisonment, and at
at Count
Count 6, no
further penalty. The sentence penalty. The sentence imposed at Count mposed at Count 4 was
was ordered
ordered to
to run
run
consecutively to to that
that imposed
mposed at
at Count
Count 1,, and the
the incarceration
ncarceration ordered
ordered at
Count 5 was Count was directed directed to
to be served
served concurrently with
with the
the sentence
sentence imposed
mposed at
at
Count 1.. Accordingly, Count Accordingly, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's aggregate
aggregate period
period of
of incarceration
ncarceration was
was 22
to 44 to years.
44 years.
Mr. Mr. Caldwell Caldwell did not file
did not file a post-sentence post-sentence motion or an appeal from his appeal from
judgment judgment of of sentence.
sentence. However,
However, on June 5, 2023, 2023, Mr. Caldwell filed
Mr. Caldwell filed a prose se
motion seeking seeking PCRA PCRA relief.
relief. Therein,
Therein, he alleged
alleged the
the following:
following:
Trial Trial counsel
counsel waswas ineffective, ineffective, because he didn't provide provide me with
with the
the necessary information nformation to to make the the decision whether
whether to to enter
enter a guilty plea or guilty plea or not.
not. Which
violates mymy 6 th amendment amendment right to counsel. Trial to counsel. Trial
counsel counsel waswas ineffective neffective for misinforming misinforming me me that
that I
would receive
receive a sentence term term of of 10 10 to
to 20 years
years in n
exchange for my my guilty plea plea to to third
third degree murder.
murder. In n
violation violation ofof my
my 6th amendment
amendment right to to counsel.
counsel. TrialTrial
counsel counsel waswas ineffective ineffective for
for failing
failing to
to object
object toto the
the
defective guilty pleaplea colloquy that did not nform me that did not in form me of of
the the possibility
possibility that
that my
my sentencing term could be term could
imposed m consecutively.
consecutively. In n violation violation of my 6th
of my
amendment amendment right to to counsel.
counsel.
See June 5, 5, 2023, 2023, PCRA Petition
Petition at
at 4.
4.
This Court Court appointed counsel
counsel to
to represent
represent Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell during
during his PCRA
PCRA
proceedings. proceedings. PCRA counsel counsel ultimately filed
filed a motion to
to withdraw
withdraw as
as counsel
counsel
and no-merit no-merit letter etter pursuant
pursuant to
to Commonwealth
Commonwealth v.
v. Turner
Turner and Commonwealth
Commonwealth v,
v.
Finley Finley. This Court Court granted PCRA counsel counsel leave
eave to
to withdraw
withdraw and provided Mr.
Mr.
Caldwell Caldwell with a notice of of intent
intent to
to dismiss
dismiss his pro se PCRA petition because the
claims claims raised raised therein lacked acked merit,
merit, among
among other
other things.
things.
By By order order entered December December 21
21,,2023 (the
(the “Order"),
"Order"), this Court
Court dismissed
dismissed
Mr. Mr. Caldwell's Caldwell's pro se PCRA prose PCRA petition.
petition. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell submitted a notice notice of
of appeal
appeal
dated dated January January 12, 12, 2024.
2024. At
At this Court's
Court's direction,
direction, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell filed
filed a Pa.R.A.P.
Pa.R.A.P.
1925(b) 1925(b) statement statement by by document
document dated February 7,, 2024.
2024.
II. Factual Background Factual
The Commonwealth The Commonwealth provided provided the
the tollowing
following factual
factual summary during
during Mr.
Mr.
Caldwell's guilty guilty plea
plea proceedings:
proceedings:
Had the Had the Commonwealth proceeded proceeded to to trial
trial in
in this
this
matter, the matter, the Commonwealth
Commonwealth would would have called have called
detectives and officers from from the
the Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh Police
Police
Department Department as well
well as civilian witnesses as civilian witnesses and and medical
medical
professionals would have professionals who would have testified testified to
to the
the following.
following.
On or
or about
about Thursday, July 4th Thursday, July 4th of of 2019,
2019, at
at
approximately 1 approximately l1
l :03
:03 p.m.,
p.m., Zone
Zone 22 officers
officers were
dispatched dispatched to to a
a shots-fired
shots-fired call
call in
in the
the 700
700 block
block of
of Penn
Penn
Avenue in Avenue in downtown Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh. Multiple
Multiple officers
responded to responded to the
the area
area asas there
there were
were thousands
thousands of of
people people inn downtown Pittsburgh Pittsburgh thatthat night night at
at the
the time
time
celebrating the celebrating the Fourth of of July July and watching
watching thethe
fireworks display. fireworks display.
On arrival,
arrival, officers found
found two males
males shot
shot inside
inside the
the
open area known as open area as the the Agnes
Agnes Katz
Katz Plaza
Plaza located
ocated on on
Penn Penn Avenue
A venue in in downtown
downtown Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh. Kenneth
Kenneth Green,
Green,
an 18-year-old
18-year-old male,
male, was
was found
found shot
shot approximately six six times in times in his upper
upper and lower
ower body.
body. [Keyari
[Keyari Wynn],
Wynn], a16-16-
year-old year-old male,
male, was
was found
found with
with one gunshot
gunshot toto the
the
head. Both head. Both victims were were rushed
rushed toto the
the hospital
hospital from
from the
the
scene. scene.
The scene was The was processed processed by Pittsburgh Police crime Pittsburgh Police crime scene unit and detectives.
detectives. Among the the evidence evidence
collected included collected included eight eight 9-millimeter shell
shell casings
casings
recovered from recovered from the scene. Additionally, the scene. Additionally, a firearm, firearm, a 9-
millimeter pistol, Model millimeter Taurus pistol, Model G2C, G2C, with Serial
Serial Number
Number
TMC81 749 was TMC81749 was recovered recovered from from a dumpster dumpster in in the
the
northwest corner northwest corner of of the the plaza.
plaza. The
The weapon was was not
not
loaded oaded and the the magazine was was empty when recovered. recovered.
In In addition,
addition, detectives
detectives from the Mobile from the Mobile Crime
Crime Unit
Unit
would testify would testify that
that multiple surveillance videos were multiple surveillance
obtained from near the crime scene and surrounding obtained from near the crime surrounding area. area. Through
Through the course of the the course investigation into the investigation into the the
incident ncident detectives detectives learned,
earned, and they would would testify testify
along along with with the the thousands
thousands of of civilians downtown on the the Fourth ofof July July to
to celebrate,
celebrate, video
video surveillance
surveillance also
also
captured two groups captured groups ofof actors actors inn a physical
physical altercation
altercation
inside of inside of Point State State Park near the
near the end of the firework of the
display. display. The The surveillance
surveillance videos
videos show
show that
that the
the group
group
separated separated at at some point point and walked
walked separately into nto the city the city before ultimately meeting ultimately meeting back up up with each
other at the other the Agnes Agnes Katz Plaza
Plaza where the the shooting shooting
occurred at occurred at approximately 1 111:00 :00 p.m.
p.m.
Video Video surveillance surveillance would would show
show that
that when thethe two
groups came together groups together in n the
the plaza,
plaza, a verbal
verbal
altercation begins altercation begins among several several individuals.
ndividuals. Some
begin to to physically physically fight each other.
other. At At approximately 1 1:02, a male wearing 1102, wearing a white white tank top top and jean shorts is observed is observed having having a gun out
out in
in his hand and begins begins
firing. This individual firing. individual was was identified
identified as thethe defendant, defendant,
Camerin Caldwell, Caldwell, from
from the
the video
video evidence
evidence by his
stepfather, Antonio stepfather, Antonio Wynn, Wynn, and his mother,
mother, Rayshonna
Rayshonna
Caldwell .... Caldwell ....
Once thethe defendant defendant beings
beings firing
firing thethe gun,
gun, Keyari
Keyari
Wynn, the Wynn, the defendant's stepbrother, stepbrother, iss observed observed to to fall
fall
to the to the ground, ground, and Kenneth Green iss seen attempting attempting to to run run prior to collapsing where police to collapsing police find find him
him on their
arrival. The arrival. The defendant defendant iss then observed observed to to run from the run from the
plaza past plaza past the the dumpster
dumpster with
with a firearm
firearm visible
visible in
n his
hand and isis seen throwing throwing the firearm into the the firearm into the dumpster where itt was dumpster was later ater recovered.
recovered. At At no no times
times
does the does the defendant defendant stop
stop to
to render
render aid. aid.
Scientist Thomas Thomas Morgan from from the the Allegheny County
Office of Office of the the Medical
Medical Examiner
Examiner would testify testify that that hehe
performs performs an examination on the the ballistics evidence evidence in in
this case and documented same at report report number number 199
LAB 05264.
05264. Scientist Morgan would would testify testify that he
examined the the 9-millimeter 9-millimeter Taurus pistol pistol recovered
recovered on
scene scene from from the the dumpster.
dumpster. He wouldwould testify testify that
that the
the
firearm was firearm was test-fired test-fired and found
found toto be operable
operable and to to
have a barrel barrel length
ength of of less
e than 15 15 inches.
inches. He would
also also testify testify that that he examined eight eight spent spent 9-millimeter
9-mil imeter
cartridge cartridge casings casings recovered
recovered on scene,
scene, and he he would would
confirm that his examination revealed confirm revealed that that all all eight
eight
casings casings were discharged discharged from
from the firearm he the Taurus firearm he
examined. examined. The The evidence would show
show that firearm
that this firearm
recovered recovered and used used in
n this instance was registered nstance was registered toto a stepbrother stepbrother of of the
the Defendant,
Defendant, Keanu Wynn ....
Victim Victim Kenneth Green, Green, who was was shot shot multiple
multiple times in n
the the upper upper and lower ower extremities and body, body, would testify that t was the defendant, testify that it was the defendant, Camerin Caldwell, Caldwell,
who shot shot him him that
that day.
day. Kenneth Green would would testify testify
that that the the two groups groups of of males
males that
that date fighting
fighting belong
belong
to to two different different gangs,
gangs, AFN and Choppa Boys. Boys. Green would explain that that these these are rival
rival gangs
gangs that
that were
releasing releasing YouTube message videos videos against against each otherother
at at the the time.
time. They had originally originally fought
fought inin Point
Point State
State
Park earlier thatthat night, night, but
but each had gone their
separate waysways until until they ran into
nto each other
other again at at
Katz Plaza.
Plaza. Green would testify testify that that he knows
knows thethe
defendant defendant Caldwell Caldwell because they used to to be friends and hung out out in n ninth grade together.
together. They eventually grew grew apart apart as as they began to to hang out out with different
different
people. people.
On On thethe night night in
in question,
question, Caldwell
Caldwell and Green gotgot into into a
fistfight. fistfight. Green lost o track ofof Caldwell Caldwell and was
was standing
standing
there watching the others others engaged and then sawsaw Camerin Caldwell Caldwell with a gun in in his hand and saw saw
Caldwell Caldwell start start firing.
firing.
The Commonwealth Commonwealth would have presented evidence at at trial trial that that the defendant
defendant was was 18
8 years
years old
old atat the
the time
time
of of this incident incident and did did not
not have a valid
valid license
license toto carry
a concealed weapon.
weapon. Additionally,
Additionally, the defendant defendant
was was a person prohibited prohibited from
from possessing
possessing a firearm
firearm asas a
result result of of an Fl1 robbery robbery conviction at at Juvenile Juvenile Case
Number 201 702191 Number 201702191 with a disposition date ofof 4/1 9/19.
4/19/19.
Through the course of of the trial, trial, the Commonwealth
Commonwealth
would have have presented medical medical records
records to support
support the
charges. charges. The medical medical records
records would havehave established established
that that Kenneth Kenneth Green Green suffered
suffered six bullet
bullet wounds
wounds to to his
body. body. He required multiple surgeries multiple surgeries and still has at still has at
least east one bullet bullet lodged
odged in n his stomach.
stomach. He suffered
suffered
severe severe damage damage to to his his colon
colon and
and kidneys
kidneys which
which require
ongoing ongoing treatment
treatment and his injuries resulted resulted in
n the
the
amputation of eft eg of his le ft le g above the knee.
the knee.
The The medical
medical records from from Keyari Keyari Wynn would show show that that
he suffered
suffered a debilitating
debilitating gunshot
gunshot would to to his head on July July 4th,
4th, 2019. As a result of 2019. As of his injuries, Keyari was njuries, Keyari was left
e
with with permanent
permanent brain
brain damage requiring constant care.
requiring constant care.
He remained
remained nonverbal
nonverbal and required
required a ventilator and feeding feeding tube until
until he eventually succumbed to to his injuries related
related to
to this incident
ncident and dieddied on or or about
about
May May 14th,
14th, 2021.
Dr. Dr. Todd Luckasevic,
Luckasevic, medical
medical examiner
examiner atat the
the
Allegheny County OfficeOffice of of the the Medical
Medical Examiner,
Examiner,
would testify
testify that
that he performed
performed an autopsy on Keyari Keyari Wynn at at Case Number
Number 21 21 COR
COR 04220.
04220. He would testify
testify
that that his autopsy showed that that asas a result of of the
the gunshot
gunshot
wound to to the
the head from
from thethe July 4th,
4th, 2019
2019 incident,
incident, the
the
bullet bullet lacerated
acerated thethe skin,
skin, subcutaneous
subcutaneous tissue
tissue and
muscle of of the
the scalp,
scalp, fractured
fractured the the skull
skull and lacerated
acerated
the the brain.
brain. His opinion would be that that Keyari Keyari Wynn dieddied
as as a result ofof complications complications from from a penetrating penetrating gunshot
gunshot
would to to the
the head and that that his manner manner of of death waswas homicide, homicide, and with that, that, the the Commonwealth
Commonwealth would
rest, rest, Your
Your Honor.
Honor.
PT at at 10-16.
10-16.
III. Ill. Discussion
In n his Pa.R.A.P.
Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)
1925(b) statement,
statement, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell alleges
alleges three
three errors.
errors. Each
of of Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's claims claims lacks
acks merit,
merit, and the
the Court
Court will
will address
address them
them in
in reverse
reverse
order. order.
A. A. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell Was
Was Informed
Informed That
That He Could Receive Consecutive Sentences Sentences
According According to to Mr.
Mr. Caldwell,
Caldwell. this
this Court
Court erred by not
not informing
nforming him
him that
that the
Court Court “could "could impose consecutive terms terms of
of imprisonment."
mprisonment." See
See Pa.R.A.P.
Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)
1925(b)
Statement Statement at at U3.
3. Such
Such an
an argument
argument isi clearly belied belied by
by the
the record.
record. As
As set
set forth
io
above on pages pages two through five, Mr. Caldwell five, Mr. Caldwell was
was apprised
apprised of
of the
the possibility of
possibility of
consecutive sentences consecutive sentences and acknowledged that that he could
could receive
receive the same.
the same.
The instant allegation The allegation of of error fails.
B. B. Mr. Caldwell
Mr. Caldwell Was
Was Not
Not Promised
Promised A Ten-
Ten- To
To Twenty- Year Sentence.
Twenty-Year Sentence.
Mr. Caldwell Mr. Caldwell further asserts that that his plea
plea counsel was “ineffective counsel was "ineffective for
promising [Mr. promising [Mr. Caldwell]
Caldwell] that
that he would receive sentence of 10 receive a sentence 10 to to 20 years
years
imprisonment."11 See Pa.R.A.P. imprisonment. 1925(b) Statement Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement at atfl 2.
2. Such a claim
claim lacks
acks
· merit.
merit.
The Superior The Superior Court
Court has
has explained:
explained:
[A] claim [A] claim for ineffective neffective assistance
assistance of
of counsel
counsel in
n
connection withwith advice rendered regarding advice rendered regarding whether to whether to
plead guilty plead guilty iss cognizable cognizable under
under the
the PCRA
PCRA pursuant
pursuant to
to
Pa. C.S.
42 Pa. C.S. § 9543(a)(2)(ii)
9543(a)(2)(H).....
.. .
Pennsylvania has Pennsylvania has recast
recast the
the two-factor
two-factor inquiry
regarding the regarding the effectiveness of of counsel
counsel set forth
forth by the
the
United States United States Supreme Court Court in
n Strickland
Strickland v.
v.
Washington...... as the
the following
following three-factor inquiry:
three-factor inquiry:
In n order
order to
to obtain relief based on an [ineffective assistance of [ineffective assistance of counsel]
counsel] claim,
claim, a
petitioner petitioner must
must establish
establish (1)
(1) the
the underlying
underlying
claim has claim has arguable
arguable merit;
merit; (2) no
reasonable reasonable basis existed
existed for counsel’s
counsel's
actions or failure
failure to
to act;
act; and (3) petitioner
petitioner
suffered prejudice suffered prejudice as a result of of counsel's error such that
that there
there iss a reasonable
reasonable
probability that
that the
the result of the
the
proceeding proceeding would
would have been different absent such error. absent error.
Trial Trial counsel
counsel isis presumed toto be effective, effective, and [a
[a
petitioner] bears petitioner] bears the
the burden of pleading and proving of pleading proving each of the
the three
three factors
factors by a preponderance of of the the
evidence. evidence.
The right to
to constitutionally effective effective assistance
assistance of
of
counsel extends to counsel extends to counsel's role n guiding role in guiding his client with regard toto the
the consequences
consequences of of entering entering into
nto a
guilty plea.
plea.
Allegations Allegations of of ineffectiveness ineffectiveness in in
connection with the entry of of a guilty plea will will serve as basis for
as a basis for relief only if the effectiveness effectiveness caused the defendant defendant to to
enter enter anan involuntary oror unknowing plea. plea. Where Where the defendant enters defendant enters his plea on plea
the advice of of counsel, counsel, the voluntariness voluntariness of of
the plea depends
depends on whether
whether counsel’s
counsel's
advice waswas within the range of of competence competence demanded
demanded of of attorneys attorneys in in
criminal criminal cases.
cases.
Thus, Thus, to establish prejudice, prejudice, thethe defendant defendant must must show show
that that there
there isi aa reasonable
reasonable probability
probability that,
that, but
but for
for
counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would would have
have insisted
insisted on on going
going toto trial.
trial. The
The reasonable
reasonable
probability probability test
test isis not
not aa stringent
stringent one;
one; itit merely
merely refers
refers to
to
a probability sufficient to undermine the confidence in a probability sufficient to undermine the confidence in the the outcome.
outcome.
Commonwealth Commonwealth v.
v. Barndt,
Barndt, 74
74 A.3d
A.3d 185,
185, 191-92
191-92 (Pa.
(Pa. Super.
Super. Ct.
Ct. 2013)
2013} (quotation
(quotation
marks marks and and citations citations omitted).
omitted).
Here, Here, the the record
record reveals
reveals that
that Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell fully
fully understood
understood -- by
by his
his own
own
admission admission -- that that he
he could
could face
face aa maximum
maximum sentence
sentence of
of 36
36 to
to 72
72 years'
years'
imprisonment. imprisonment. See See PT
PT at
at 8-9.
8-9. The
The record
record also
also makes
makes clear
clear that
that there
there ”[wa]s
"[wa]s no
no
agreement agreement as as to
to sentence"
sentence" between
between the
the parties.
parties. Id.
I . at
at 3.
3. Further,
Further, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell
affirmed affirmed under under oath oath that
that no
no one,
one, not
not even
even his
his attorney,
attorney, had
had “promised
"promised [him]
[him]
anything anything inin exchange exchange for
for [his]
[his] guilty
guilty plea
plea other
other than
than the
the terms
terms of
of [the]
[the] plea
plea
bargain!,]” bargain[,]" which, which, as
as noted,
noted, did
did not
not involve
in an
an agreement
agreement as
as to
to sentence.
sentence. See
See
Guilty Plea Plea Explanation Of Of Defendant's Rights at
at 9,
9, Question 56;
56; see
see also
also PT at
at 2
&6-7 6-7 (Mr.
(Mr. Caldwell Caldwell acknowledging that that he completed the
the Guilty Plea
Plea
Explanation Of Of Defendant's
Defendant's Rights
Rights form
form and answered every question "truthfully "truthfully
and honestly[,]"
honestly(,]" among other other things).
things).
The Superior Superior Court
Court has
has stated:
stated:
The longstanding
ongstanding rule rule of
of Pennsylvania lawaw is that that a
defendant defendant may may not
not challenge his guilty plea plea by asserting that he lied while under oath, asserting that he lied while under oath, even if he he avers
avers
that that counsel
counsel induced the the lies.
ies. A person who
who elects
elects to
to
plead guilty is bound
bound by by the
the statements
statements he makes
makes inn
open court while under oath open court while under oath and he may not la he may not ater
ter
asserts asserts grounds
grounds for
for withdrawing the the plea plea which
which
contradict contradict the
the statements
statements he he made
made atat his
his plea
plea
colloquy. . . . colloquy ....
Commonwealth Commonwealth v, v. Pollard
Pol a , 832
832 A.2d
A.2d 51 7, 523-24
517, 523-24 (Pa.
(Pa. Super.
Super. Ct.
Ct. 2003);
2003); see
see also
also id.
id.
at at 524 524 ("a ("a defendant defendant may
may not
not knowingly
knowingly lie
l e to
to the
the court
court while
while under
under oath"
oath" and
and
"[w]e "[w)e cannot cannot permit permit aa defendant
defendant to
to postpone
postpone the
the final
final disposition
disposition of
of his
his case
case by
by
lying lying to to the the court court and
and later
later alleging
alleging that
that his
his lies
l es were
were induced
induced by
by the
the prompting
prompting
of of counsel"
counsel" (citation (citation omitted)).
omitted)).
Based Based on on the
the foregoing,
foregoing, Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's
Caldwell's instant
instant claim
claim of
of ineffectiveness
ineffectiveness
fails. fails. The The record record demonstrates
demonstrates that
that there
there was
was no
no agreement
agreement as
as to
to sentence
sentence inin
exchange exchange for for Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's
Caldwell's guilty
guilty plea,
plea, that
that Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell admitted
admitted that
that he
he
knew knew he he faced faced aa potential potential sentence
sentence of
of 36
36 to
to 72
72 years’
years' incarceration,
incarceration, and
and that
that
Mr. Mr. Caldwell Caldwell swore swore he
he had
had not
not been
been promised
promised anything
anything (even
( even by
by his
his counsel)
counsel)
other other than than the the plea
plea agreement
agreement as
as stated
stated on
on the
the record.
record. He
He cannot
cannot now
now assert
assert
otherwise otherwise and, and, thereby,
thereby, obtain
obtain relief.
relief. His
His claim
claim that
that counsel
counsel promised
promised him
him aa tenten
-
to twenty-year to twenty-year sentence sentence lacks
acks merit.
merit. No ineffective
ineffective assistance
assistance of
of counsel was
counsel was
properly pled proven.
pied or proven.
C. C. Counsel Did Counsel Did Not
Not Cause Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell To
To Enter
Enter An Unlawful
Unlawful Plea.
Plea.
Mr. Mr. Caldwell’s Caldwell's final
final claim
claim of purported
purported error iss that
that plea
plea counsel
counsel was
was
"ineffective for causing “ineffective causing [Mr.
[Mr. Caldwell]
Caldwell] to
to enter
enter an unknowing,
unknowing, unintelligent
unintelligent and
involuntary guilty guilty plea
plea by not
not providing
providing [him]
[him] with
with accurate and sufficient sufficient
information nformation that [he]
[he] needed to
to decide whether or
decide whether or not
not to
to enter
enter a plea
plea of
of
guilty [.]" See Pa. guilty[.]" R.A.P. 1925(b)
Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement Statement at 1],I 1.
1. Such a claim
claim fails.
The The standard standard for ineffective assistance of neffective assistance counsel as itt relates to of counsel to a guilty guilty
plea has plea has been set set forth
forth above.
above. In
n addition,
addition, the
the Superior
Superior Court
Court has
has explained:
explained:
A court
court accepting
accepting a defendant's guilty guilty plea
plea iss required
required
to to conduct
conduct an on-the-record
on-the-record inquiry
nquiry during
during the
the plea
plea
colloquy [to
[to determine
determine the
the lawfulness
awfulness ofof the
the plea].
plea]. The
The
colloquy must
must inquire
nquire into
nto the
the following
following areas:
areas:
(11 ) Does
Does the
the defendant
defendant understand
understand the
the nature of the
the
charges to charges to which he or she s pleading she is pleading guilty
guilty or
or no/o
contendere?
(2) Iss there
there a factual
factual basis for the
the plea?
(3) Does
Does the
the defendant
defendant understand
understand that
that he or
or she
she has
has
the right to the to trial
trial by jury?
(4) Does
Does the
the defendant
defendant understand
understand that
that he
he or
or she
she is
is
presumed innocent
nnocent until
until found
found guilty?
(5) Iss the
the defendant
defendant aware of the the permissible permissible range of
of
sentences and/or sentences and/or fines for the the offenses charged?
(6) Iss the
the defendant
defendant aware that
that the
the judge
judge iss not
not bound
the
by the terms of
of any plea agreement
plea agreement tendered unless the judge the accepts such agreement?
judge accepts
Pollard Pollard,, 832 A.2d at at 522-23 (citation
(citation omitted).
omitted}. Such areas
areas of nquiry
of in quiry may
may be
addressed by the the court
court in
in a "written
"written colloquy that
that isis read,
read, completed,
completed, signed
signed by
the the defendant, defendant, and made part part of
of the
the record of
of the plea proceedings [,]" see proceedings[,]"
Pa. R. Crim. P. 590 at Pa.R.Crim.P. at cmmt„ cmmt., which occurred in
n this case,
case, see PT at
at 6-7.
6-7. "Our
"Our law
aw
presumes presumes that that a defendant defendant who enters
enters a guilty plea was
was aware of
of what
what he was
was
doing[, doing[, and the defendant] .. bears defendant] ... bears the burden of of proving otherwise."
otherwise." Pollard,
832 A2d at at 523.
523.
Here, Here, the the Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's
Caldwell's Guilty Plea Explanation Of Of Defendant's
Defendant's Rights
Rights
form form and oral oral colloquy during during the plea
plea proceedings,
proceedings, as
as well
well as
as the
the
Commonwealths’ Commonwealths' factual factual recitation,
recitation, demonstrate
demonstrate that
that Mr.
Mr. Caldwell's
Caldwell's guilty
guilty plea
plea
was was knowing, knowing, intelligent, intelligent, and
and voluntary,
voluntary, and
and thus
thus lawful.
lawful. He
He has
has not
not
demonstrated demonstrated otherwise.
otherwise. Accordingly,
Accordingly, his
his argument
argument that
that plea
plea counsel
counsel did
did not
not
provide provide him him with with accurate
accurate and
and sufficient
sufficient information
information lacks
lacks merit.
merit. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell
has has not not properly properly pled pied or
or proven
proven ineffective
in assistance
assistance of
of counsel.
counsel.
IV. IV. Conclusion Conclusion
Based Based on on the
the foregoing,
foregoing, the
the Order
Order should
should be
be affirmed.
affirmed. Mr.
Mr. Caldwell
Caldwell was
was
not not entitled entitled to to PCRA
PCRA relief.
relief. The
The Department
Department of
of Court
Court Records,
Records, Criminal
Criminal Division,
Division,
isis ordered ordered and and directed
directed to
to transmit
transmit the
the record
record ini the
the above-captioned
above-captioned matter
matter to
to
the the Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Superior Superior Court
Court without
without delay.
delay.
BY BY THE
THE COURT:
COURT:
cs+ca Dated: Sh+l34 46---
Susan Susan Evashavik
Evashavik DiLucente
DiLucente
J.
cc: cc: Ronald M.
Deputy District Attorney Ronald M. Wabby, Wabby, Jr.
Office Office of of the
the District Attorney
401 401 Allegheny County Courthouse Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA PA 15219
15219
Camerin Caldwell Caldwell
QP1482 QP1 482 SCI SCI Forest Forest
P.O. P.O. Box B0x 945
286 Woodland Drive Drive
Marienville, Marienville, PA PA 16239
Com. v. Caldwell, C. (Com. v. Caldwell, C.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.