Case Title: Commonwealth v. Martin, M. (summary disposition)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 356 MAL 2023

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 2024-04-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Respondent v. MICHAEL T. MARTIN, JR., Petitioner : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 356 MAL 2023 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Published Opinion and Order of the Superior Court at No. 791 MDA 2022, at 297 A.3d 424 (Pa. Super. 2023) entered on June 12, 2023, reversing and remanding the Order of the Franklin/Fulton County Court of Common Pleas at No. CP-28-CR- 0002065-2019 entered on May 13, 2022 ORDER PER CURIAM DECIDED: April 23, 2024 AND NOW, this 23rd day of April, 2024, we GRANT the petition for allowance of appeal, VACATE the Superior Court’s decision reversing the trial court’s grant of the motion for a new trial based on the weight of the evidence, and REMAND for the Superior Court to review the challenge to the trial court’s order under the appropriate appellate standard of review. Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745, 752 (Pa. 2000) (appellate court must give “the gravest consideration to the findings and reasons advanced by the trial judge when reviewing a trial court’s determination that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence” and consider each of the reasons given by the trial court to determine if trial court’s discretion was exercised on “a foundation of reason”); Commonwealth v. Clay, 64 A.3d 1049, 1053 (Pa. 2013) (reviewing court must “give the gravest consideration to the findings and reasons” of the trial court and finding that Superior Court did not apply the proper abuse of discretion standard because it “failed to consider the discretion [356 MAL 2023] - 2 exercised by the trial judge or the findings and reasons advanced by the judge in support of his determination”); Commonwealth v. DiStefano, 265 A.3d 290 (Pa. 2021) (Superior Court must specify how trial court abused its discretion).