J-S89026-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellee

v.

JAMAL L. SMITH

Appellant No. 1103 EDA 2016

Appeal from the PCRA Order April 1, 2016

In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County

Criminal Division at No(s): CP-09-CR-0007676-2009

BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., MOULTON, J., and FITZGERALD, J.*

MEMORANDUM BY MOULTON, J.: FILED MARCH 15, 2017

Jamal L. Smith appeals from the April 1, 2016 order of the Bucks 

County Court of Common Pleas denying his petition for relief under the Post 

Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-46. Smith’s counsel has 

also filed with this Court a Turner/Finley1 no-merit letter and a petition to 

withdraw from representation. We affirm the PCRA court’s order and grant 

counsel’s petition to withdraw.

On August 20, 2010, after a four-day trial, a jury convicted Smith of 

second-degree murder, robbery, and possession of an instrument of crime.2 

____________________________________________

*

Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.

1 Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988); 

Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa.Super. 1988) (en banc).

2 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 2502(b), 3701(a)(1)(i), and 907(a), respectively. 
J-S89026-16

- 2 -

On October 14, 2010, the trial court sentenced Smith to an aggregate term 

of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The PCRA court set forth the factual history underlying Smith’s 

convictions in its May 10, 2016 opinion, which we adopt and incorporate 

herein. See Opinion, 5/10/16, at 1-12 (“1925(a) Op.”).

Smith did not file post-sentence motions. On October 15, 2010, Smith 

timely appealed to this Court, which affirmed his judgment of sentence on 

March 29, 2012. On September 13, 2012, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court 

denied Smith’s petition for allowance of appeal.

On October 18, 2012, Smith filed a pro se letter with the PCRA court, 

which the PCRA court treated as a timely PCRA petition. After the 

appointment of counsel, Smith filed amended PCRA petitions on March 4, 

2013 and February 8, 2016.3 On February 9 and March 28, 2016, the PCRA 

court held an evidentiary hearing at which Smith and his trial attorneys, 

Keith J. Williams and John Fioravanti, Jr., testified. On April 1, 2016, the 

PCRA court denied Smith’s petition.

____________________________________________

3 Between the filing of the first and second amended PCRA petitions, 

the PCRA court ordered three mental health evaluations to determine 

whether Smith was competent to participate in the PCRA proceedings. The 

record shows that Smith suffers cognitive and hearing impairments and had 

the assistance of sign-language interpreters during the trial and PCRA 

proceedings. Each mental health evaluation resulted in a determination that 

Smith was competent to understand the proceedings against him and assist 

in his own defense. PCRA counsel also verified that he was “satisfied [that 

Smith] was competent to proceed with the PCRA proceedings.” No-Merit 

Letter at 8 (unpaginated).
J-S89026-16

- 3 -

On April 7, 2016, Smith filed a timely notice of appeal. On April 11, 

2016, the PCRA court directed Smith to file a Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 1925(b) statement of errors complained of on appeal within 21 

days. In lieu of a Rule 1925(b) statement, Smith’s PCRA counsel filed a Rule 

1925(c)(4) statement, notifying the court that he intended to file a no-merit 

letter and a petition to withdraw from representation due to the lack of 

meritorious issues for appeal. Thereafter, on July 5, 2016, counsel filed with 

this Court a no-merit letter and a petition to withdraw from representation.

Before we may address the merits of Smith’s appeal, we must 

determine whether his PCRA counsel has satisfied the requirements for 

withdrawal under Turner/Finley. Counsel must

file a “no-merit” letter detailing the nature and extent of 

his review and list[ing] each issue the petitioner wishes to 

have examined, explaining why those issues are meritless. 

The PCRA court, or an appellate court if the no-merit letter 

is filed before it, then must conduct its own independent 

evaluation of the record and agree with counsel that the 

petition is without merit. 

Commonwealth v. Rykard, 55 A.3d 1177, 1184 (Pa.Super. 2012) (internal 

citation omitted). Counsel also must serve copies of the petition to withdraw 

and no-merit letter on the petitioner and advise the petitioner that he or she 

has the right to proceed pro se or with privately retained counsel. 

Commonwealth v. Widgins, 29 A.3d 816, 818 (Pa.Super. 2011).

In his no-merit letter, PCRA counsel states that he reviewed the record 

and applicable law, identified the issues Smith wished to raise, and explained 

why those issues are meritless. He also mailed a copy of the petition and 
J-S89026-16

- 4 -

no-merit letter to Smith and informed Smith of his right to proceed pro se or 

with private counsel.4 We conclude that PCRA counsel has complied with the 

dictates of Turner/Finley.

Because Smith did not file a pro se brief or a brief by private counsel, 

we will address the merits of the claims raised by PCRA counsel.

PCRA counsel has identified two issues for appeal: (1) whether trial 

counsel were ineffective “for not presenting a defense based on the victim’s 

having tried to rob [Smith], causing [Smith] to use a knife in self-defense 

against the victim, resulting in the victim’s death”; and (2) whether trial 

counsel were ineffective “for not discovering [or] removing the influence of 

[Smith’s family], which exercised undue influence on [Smith] to avoid 

presenting a defense that he acted in self-defense when he killed the 

victim.” Second Am. PCRA Pet., ¶¶ 2(b), (c); see No-Merit Letter at 6 

(unpaginated).

Our review of an order denying PCRA relief is limited to determining 

“whether the decision of the PCRA court is supported by the evidence of 

record and is free of legal error.” Commonwealth v. Melendez–Negron, 

____________________________________________

4 Counsel’s initial letter to Smith incorrectly advised Smith that he had 

the right to proceed pro se or with new counsel if this Court agreed with 

counsel’s position that the issues on appeal lack merit. Therefore, on July 

28, 2016, we directed counsel to file with this Court “a letter addressed to 

[Smith] advising him of his immediate right to proceed pro se or with 

privately retained counsel” within 14 days. Super. Ct. Order, 7/28/16. 

Counsel complied and filed a revised letter with this Court on July 28, 2016. 

The letter states that counsel mailed the letter to Smith on the same day.
J-S89026-16

- 5 -

123 A.3d 1087, 1090 (Pa.Super. 2015). We will not disturb the PCRA court’s 

factual findings “unless there is no support for [those] findings in the 

certified record.” Id.

To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a PCRA 

petitioner must show that: (1) the underlying claim has arguable merit; (2) 

counsel had no reasonable, strategic basis for his or her act or omission; and 

(3) but for counsel’s act or omission, there is a reasonable probability that 

the outcome of the proceedings would have been different. 

Commonwealth v. Kimball, 724 A.2d 326, 333 (Pa. 1999). Counsel is 

presumed to be effective, and the petitioner has the burden of proving each 

of the three prongs by a preponderance of the evidence. Commonwealth 

v. Steckley, 128 A.3d 826, 831 (Pa.Super. 2015), app. denied, 140 A.3d 13 

(Pa. 2016).

Smith first argues that his trial counsel were ineffective for failing to 

present a self-defense theory to the jury when Smith allegedly had told 

counsel before trial that he had stabbed the victim because the victim was 

trying to rob him.

In a July 18, 2009 interview with police, Smith described the incident 

as follows:

[Smith] stated that he intended on getting some money 

from the [victim] but the [victim] told him that he did not 

have any money . . . . [Smith] stated that he pulled out a 

small folding knife and the [victim] pulled out a brown 

switch blade. The [victim] then turned in his seat and 

began kicking [Smith] in the face causing a cut under 

[Smith’s] eye. [Smith] dropped his knife and was holding 

his hands up to his face when the [victim] tried to stab 
J-S89026-16

- 6 -

him. [Smith] was able to grab the [victim’s] arm 

preventing [him] from stabbing him. As they struggled 

over the knife [Smith] turned his back slightly to the 

[victim] and the [victim] bit [Smith] on the left 

back/shoulder blade. They continued to struggle over the 

knife until [Smith] was able to pull the knife out of the 

[victim’s] hand. In the course of wresting the knife out of 

the [victim’s] hand [Smith] received a small laceration to 

the web of his left hand. . . .

As they continued to struggle [Smith] stabbed the [victim] 

in the leg and also admitted to stabbing the [victim] in the 

front shoulder, two times in the back and three times in 

the chest/stomach area. [Smith] stated that he stabbed 

the [victim] so many times because he was scared 

because the guy had tried to stab him.

Trial Ct. Op., 6/10/11, at 7 (quoting Smith’s 7/18/09 statement).

At trial, however, Smith contested the validity of his July 18, 2009 

statement to police, stating that “[h]e was popping pills and high during the 

interview.” Id. at 14. Smith also denied killing the victim and testified “that 

a ‘Blood’ gang member by the name of Corey Talley a.k.a. Corey Mills 

committed the murder.” Id. at 13. Smith testified that “he initially told 

police that Mills committed the murder, but later told police that [Smith] did 

it because he was scared for his safety and the safety of his family,” because 

Mills had threated to kill Smith if he told anyone. Id. at 14.

At the PCRA hearing, Smith testified that before trial, he informed one 

of his trial counsel, Williams, that he had stabbed the victim because the 

victim was trying to rob him. N.T., 3/28/16, at 25-26. Williams, however, 

testified that Smith denied stabbing the victim and told him that Corey 

Talley had killed the victim. Id. at 48. Williams also testified that he had 

advised Smith before trial that “the story he told the police might lead to a 
J-S89026-16

- 7 -

better verdict,” id. at 49, but Smith still denied killing the victim. Smith’s 

other trial counsel, Fioravanti, also testified that Smith never admitted that 

he had killed the victim. Id. at 63.

We agree with the PCRA court that because Smith denied killing the 

victim, his attorneys had a reasonable, strategic basis for not presenting a 

self-defense theory to the jury.5 Furthermore, as the PCRA court found, 

“[e]ven if counsel had presented such a defense, the outcome of the 

proceedings would not have been different due to the overwhelming 

evidence presented at trial.” 1925(a) Op. at 17-18. We conclude that the 

record supports the PCRA court’s findings.

Next, Smith argues that trial counsel were ineffective for failing to 

remove the undue influence of his family. This claim lacks merit. 

After hearing the testimony of Smith and his trial attorneys at the 

hearing, the PCRA court found:

According to [Smith], his mother threatened him and told 

him that if he told the truth during trial, she would kill his 

kids. Besides this alleged threat, [Smith] testified that his 

mother said she “could get the reward money” if the 

appellant lied. He testified that his mother also told him 

not to say anything when she visited [Smith] at prison. No 

evidence was presented to support these bald assertions. 

Thus, without more, [Smith’s] underlying claim is 

meritless. 

____________________________________________

5 At the PCRA hearing, Smith testified that he had lied to the jury 

when he denied killing the victim and implicated Corey Talley in the murder. 

N.T., 3/28/16, at 40-41.
J-S89026-16

- 8 -

According to Mr. Williams, although [Smith’s] mother 

did not believe that her son killed the victim and might 

have influenced her son because of this belief, she “tried to 

be as cooperative as she could be under the 

circumstances.” Moreover, when [Smith] met with his 

lawyers with his mother present, she did not tell [him] 

what to say at trial. However, when [Smith] met with his 

lawyers alone, he still failed to admit to killing the victim.

1925(a) Op. at 18-19 (citations omitted). The PCRA court credited the 

testimony of Williams and Fioravanti and discredited Smith’s testimony. 

Because the record supports the PCRA court’s credibility determinations, we 

are bound by them. See Commonwealth v. Roane, 142 A.3d 79, 86 

(Pa.Super. 2016). Accordingly, we conclude that the PCRA court properly 

denied Smith’s PCRA petition.

Order affirmed. Petition to withdraw granted.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 3/15/2017
l 

.. , In the early morning hours on July 8, 200Q, Debra Reynolds called police to 

report a dead body lying outside of a white Jeep in the parking lot of'the Marion 

Village Apartment Complex. N;T. 8/ 17/10, p. 29. Located between the 

Delaware Canal, Edgely Road, and Bristol Pike (RoutelS). in Bristol Township, 

Bucks County, Pennsylvania, this apartment complex is described as a high-drug, 

high-crime area. N.T. 8/18/10, p. 105; N'.T, 8/1_7/lO; pp, ~6, 57; Exhs. C-10, C-. 

ll, C-l2. OfficerPeter Hollenezer, art. officer with the Bristol Township Police 

Department Who has twenty-two years of experience,tespondedto the call. N.T. 

8/17/1 o, pp. 25-26. 

Upon his arrival, Officer Hollenczerfound an elderly white male lying outside of 

a white Jeep with one leg still inside the driver's door of the vehicle. N;T. 

~/17/10, p. 26; EJ:Chs. G-1, C-6, C-7. The body was directly in frontof the 800 

building. N .T .. 8/17/JO, p. 51. As the officer approached, he saw blood around 

the stomach and neckline, but could not see any apparent injuries. N.T, 8/17/JO, 

p. 2 7; Exhs, C-l, C-6, C-7, C-8. The man.did nothave a pulse and the rescue 

squad confirmed that he was, in fact; deceased. N.T; 8/l7/l0i pp. 27-28. 

opinion. filed on June I 0, 2011 : 

The following is.a summary of the relevantfacfs and procedural history as set forth in our 

I. FACTS ANDPROCEDURE ~-. 

"-'· 

Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(a). 

meritorious issues supporting the appellant's appeal. This Court files this opinion pursuant to 

PCRACounsel has filed a Statement Pursuant to Pa.R . .App.Pro. 1925(<;)(4) due to lack of any 

denying relief under the Post.Conviction Relief Act (hereinafter "PCRA'} The appellant's 

On appeal, the appellant, JamalL. Smith, challenges this Court's April I, 2016 Order 

OP lN'r ON 

JAMAL L. SMITH 

v. 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA No. CP-09-CR-0007676-2009 

IN TH'.E COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BUCKS COUNTY, PENNSYLVAN1A 

•,_ CRI1VIINAL DIVISlON 

. ····~· .. -· .. -· . _.,. ·-·-----·- .. -~ .. -_.,.,-.. Circulated 02/14/2017 02:07 PM - . ·-··-····-· 
2 

Police recovered fingerprints from the vehicles. Fingerprints Were found on the 

Jeep's driver's door interior window. N.T. 8/18/101pp. 220-:23; EXh1l. c .. 53, C56, C"60. Police also recovered prints on the exterior of the BMW and the 

exterior ofthe Jeep's passenger side. N.T. 8/19/1.0, pp. 68-69, 71-72; N.T. 

8/l&/10, p. 231. 

On July 14, 2009 and Julyl5, 2009/Bristol Township Police Department 

Detectives Gregory Beidler and.Jack Slattery, who possess twenty-two years and 

seven years of experience respectively, secured a search warrant and searched the 

white Jeep and black BMW .. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 205, 210~11, 213;.N.T. 8/17/10, p. 

217; Exhs, c .. 57, C-60, C-61, C'-64. Timothy Fuhrman, ij detective with the 

Bristol Township Police Department who has twenty years of experience, also 

assisted with the processing ofthe vehicles. N.T 8/19/10, pp. 64-66. 

The two-door Jeep had two front seats that were separated by a flo_or-rnounted 

gear shifterand a rear bench seat. N,T. 8./18/10, p. 216. The Jeep contained a 

large amount of blood in the front passenger area. N ,T, 8/1-8110, p. 216; N. T. 

8/17/10, p, 63; Exhs. C-13, C· 14, C-57, C-61. Blood was located on both front 

seats, both door panels, the headliner, and the backseat. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 216-17; 

N.T. 8/17/10, p. 63; Exhs. C.;;13, C'-14, C~57, C-61. The passenger's side door of 

the Jeep was locked. N,T. 8119/10, p, 106. 

Police investigation revealed that the victim was a homeless man by the name of 

John "Jack'' Reil, N .T. 8/17/101 pp. 35, 67i Exhs. C-2, C;.15. Reil had permission 

to sleep in his.friend Susan Kowalick's 1989 white Jeep Cherokee. N.T. 8/17/10, 

pp. 34-35, 37; Exh. C-3. Kowalick resides in the .800 building of the apartment 

complex and parked her Jeep directly outside of her apartment's windows .. N.T. 

8/17/101 pp. 34, 37. When Kowalick last saw Reil at·7;30 a.m. on July 7,2009, 

she gave him ten dollars, which he put in his walle], N.T, 8/17/10, p. 45. · 

The Jeep and nearby black BMW were secured and taken.to the Bristol Township 

Police evidence garage; N.T. 8/17/10, pp. 65"66. 

At 5.:47 a.rn., William O'Keefe, a detective with the Bristol Township Police 

Department who has seventeen years ofexperience-responded to the parking lot 

of'the apartment complex fora possible homicide investigation. N~T. 8/17/10, pp. 

49 ... 50, 67. The victim's body was still located between the white Jeep and black 

BMW and it was covered with a White sheet. N.T. 8/17/10, pp. 5l-52;Exhs. C-4, 

C-5, C-6, C- 7, C-8. The coroner showed police multiple stab wounds on the 

victim's back. N.T. 8/17/10, p. 56; Exh, C-9. No wallet was found onthe victim, 

N.T, 8/17/10, p, 56. 

Reynolds> her son, Joseph Slater, and his fiancee, Amanda Cliver, told police that 

they did not know whathad happened, N.T. 8/17/10; pp. 30.,_31. 

. '·- . ., . ·- . ·· .. --· . . .. . . . . . ~ -·~- _... : ·- ·-. - .. ··--. ~ .-.- . 
·-------------------------· -·-·-··-· ····--·----·-·-·-------······--··-·········· 

J 

Joseph said sometime that night "Boo Boo" and "Man Man11 were 

outside with them. and Joseph wanted to buy some weed. Joseph 

said that Maly initially attempted to buy weed from the 900 building 

of the apartment complex, but was unable to. Joseph said Man Man 

went over by building 500 and purchased a dime bag of weed. 

Joseph said he and Man Man smoked the weed. Joseph said he · .. ~ .. 

Joseph was told to explain what happenedthatnight, Joseph said he 

was outside of building 800·at about 8':00 p.m, the night before the 

murder (July 7) with his flancee, Amanda. Joseph said Maly came 

up.and started hanging out with them and Joseph asked Amanda and 

Maly if they wanted to go to the Ball Park to buy some beer. Joseph 

saidthe three walked to the Ball Park and-Amanda was pushing her 

stroller with their daughter, Amanda waited outside with their 

daughter and Joseph and Maly went inside and purchased three forty 

ounce bottles of'beer, They all walked backto building 800 and sat 

outside on the step drinking beer. Joseph said Maly pulled a knife 

out of his side pocket Joseph stated that Maly said that if he was 

fighting wfth someone, he would. stab them, While making stabbing 

motions with the knife .. Joseph stated that Maly then dropped the 

knife on the ground accidentally. Joseph said he told Maly to put 

the knife awaybecause .he was drunk and Maly put the knife in his 

right front pocket. Joseph described the knife as seven or eight 

inches long, with a wood handle and silver blade. 

Joseph then started tearing up and stated I just need to tell you 

"Maly" did it. Joseph said Maly admitted to me that he stabbed the 

guy. 

Joseph was interviewed at the Bristol Township Police Station at 

1340 hours. Joseph was tok{ that during a previous interview he 

stated that he went to the Seven Eleven on July 8, 2009. at 

approximately 3:00 a.rn. Joseph was told that the video surveillance 

from Seven Eleven proved that he did not go to the Seven Eleven 

that night. Joseph then said he went to the Ball Park Tavern but 

found· the bar was closed. Joseph said he lied because he did not 

want his wife to know he was gqingto the Ball Park, Again Joseph 

was told that we did not believe his story, . 

On July 17, 2009, police interviewed Joseph Slater, N.T. 8/18/lOJ p. 180. During 

the .interview Slater broke down, started crying, and told police what happened on 

the night of the murder. N.T. 8!17/10, p. 107. Because Slater is dyslexic, police 

memorialized the interview into a statement which Slater amended and then 

signed. N.T. 8/18/10, p.181; Exh, C-17: The statement is as follows: 

The-victim's wallet was not recovered from the Jeep. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 2TI, 227. 

. . '-'""''"" ... -- .. -- ... ·,--···-~-· ,· . · ..... -··--- -·-·~---·~·----··· 
------------------------- ·••«-·-----------·--·-·-·-«-···--·«•' 

4 

Joseph said he could see the end of a knife handle sticking out of 

Maly's back pocket. Joseph said he asked Maly what it was and he 

said nothing. Joseph saidhe asked again and Maly pulled the knife 

he seen Maly with earlier from his back pocket. Joseph said the 

knife was in the open position and the blade and most of the handle 

was wrapped in a tan Dickles button .up wor:k shirt. Joseph said he 

saw Maly wearing the Dickies shirt earlier that day. Joseph said 

Maly then unwrapped the knife and put the knife, on top ofthe shirt, 

on the floor ofthe laundry TOOJil in front of the Washer; Joseph said 

he could see a little blood on the blade of the knife as well as blood 

transfer from the blade cm the shirt. Maly stated that there was also 

blood on Maly' s left hand on the blade of his palm. Joseph said that 

Maly pointed out of the laundry room windows in the direction of 

the parking lot when asked where this happened, Joseph said Maly 

told him it happened by the white car. Joseph stated that Maly asked 

Joseph said he, his mother; fiancee and their daughter all left Lower 

Bucks Hospital together at about :3:00 a.01. Joseph said they drove 

directly pack to the apartment and went inside. Joseph said they 

were up talking and at about 4:00 a.m. they heard a light tapping on 

the door; Joseph said that his mother initially answered the do or, 

but no one was there. Joseph said that he then went to the door and 

did not see anyone around, Joseph said he was going to go outto 

smoke a cigarette anyway and when he was outside of his apartment, 

Maly appeared from the laundry room 011 the same floor. Joseph 

said Maly was motioning for Joseph to come to him and when 

Joseph walked down fo the laundry room Maly asked him to come 

.inside, Joseph said he was a little nervous about going inside 

because it was. dark and he didn't know what Maly was up to . 

Joseph said he went inside and Maly kept. repeating to Joseph that 

hejust killed somebody. Joseph said he asked Maly why he killed 

this person and Maly kept. saying that he grabbed me as he was 

showing Joseph his neck and pulling his collar from bis neck area. 

Joseph said he did not notice any injuries on Maly's neck and he 

.asked Maly why he didn't just run away. Joseph said Maly said he 

couldn't get away and l stabbed him. 

thinks Man Man and Boo Boo went back inside of their apartment 

about fifteen minutes before his daughter was bumped by the door. 

Joseph said either a lady or heavy set guy opened the door of 

building SOO and struck his daughter in the head, Joseph said he 

grabbed his daughter and went inside apartment 803 and asked his 

motherto drive them to the hospital. Joseph said they walked past 

Maly as they Were leaving for the. hospital .and Maly asked if he 

eould go. When told he couldn't go Joseph said Maly looked sad 

and lost. 

-· "'<>\ 

• "'-•·• ,,-~'- d.,,,_.._ .. r, _.. .... • , 0 ----. •--~---•'-•-•.._,...,..,.-.... - ~. 
5 

Slaterresides with this mother in the 800 building of the complex. N.T. 8/17/10, 

pp. 32, 81. Slater's nickname is "Cheech." N.T. 8/17/lOt p, 80. Slater met the 

defendant, whom he called "Maly' at.the apartment complex a few weeks prior. 

N,T. 8/17/10, pp. 80~8 l. Slater spoke to· police several timesafter the 911 call 

was made, but did. not initially tell them about his conversation with the defendant 

because he livedin a "rough area" and he. was scared for the safety of his family. 

Exh, C-17, 

I, Jq~eph Slat~r, swear and affirm that the above statement is, an 

accurate summary of my interview with Bristol Township 

Detectives William O'Keefe and Jack Slattery on Friday, July 17, 

2009. . 

SignedJoseph W. Slater IV, 7/17/09, 4:46 p.m. 

Joseph described Maly as a short deaf black male and thinks his real 

nameis Jamal. Joseph said they call him Maly, Joseph was shown 

a photograph of Jamal Smith and identified him as Maly. 

Joseph said he walked Maly out of the building and -told him to just 

go as he pointed left, telling Maly to leave the apartments. Joseph 

said he went back to the apartment and told Amanda and his mother 

Debra what Maly justtold him. Joseph said his mother continuedto 

say she .does not believe Maly would do such a thing. Joseph said 

he and. his fiancee, Amanda walked out in the parking lot and 

discovered the body by the white Jeep. Joseph said the two 

immediately became upset and went back to his mother and told her 

Maly did it and you need to call the police. Joseph said he never 

made contact with the victim or the vehiclet.however he did see the 

victim inthe parking lotthe day beforeatabout 7:00p;m. and.shook 

the victim's hand. Joseph asked if he touched the outside of the 

vehicle at.all and Joseph said he does not think he did. 

him to come outto the parking lot to see the victim. Joseph advised 

'that he stated that he did not want to see anything and told Maly that 

he should leave. Joseph said Maly wrapped the knife back in, the 

shirt and put the knife inhis back pocket still in the opened position. 

Joseph. said Maly asked him several times if he would tell on him 

and asked Joseph not to tell on him. Joseph said that Maly stated "I 

don't like when people tell on me." Joseph described Maly as 

nervous, shaken up and that he was pacing back and forth and 

banging his head on the walls of the laundry tcom. Joseph saidMaly 

was wearing a maroon 'thermal shirt; dark three quarter lengthjean 

shorts and black and green sneakers. · 
............. .-.,....,.~,- .. -- ·---- ·------·---- .. -----·----- 

6 

Jamal.walked up to the driver's door and got into the driver's seat. 

Jamal stated that he intended on getting some money from the white 

male but the white male told him that he did not have any money 

because the black female took $60.00 from him. Jamal stated that 

he pulled out a small folding knife and the white male pulled out a 

brown switch blade. The white male then turned in his seat and 

began kicking Jamal in the face causing a cut under Jamal's eye. 

Jamal dropped his knife and was holding his hands up to his face: 

when the white male tried to stab him. Jamal was able to. grab the ·\..,_. 

In summary Jamal stated that on July 8, 200~, he was in theparking 

lot of the Marion Village Apartment complex. He saw a black 

female who he knows to be a prostitute who goes by the name of 

"Brown Sugar". Brown Sugar got into ajeep occupied by a white 

male that was parked in front of the 800 building, The black female 

and the white male sa.t in the jeep and smoked craok and ''fucked". 

While they were in the jeep the white male was sitting in the 

passenger front seat· while the black female sat in the front driver's 

seat. After about thirty minutes the black female opened the driver's 

door and exited, leaving the door open as she walked away. 

. ........,,, 

Jamal Smith was interviewed at the-Bristol Township Police station 

at about 0030 hours -on July 18, 2009, Also present during the 

interview were Joy Harrisand Cren Quigley who are certified.sign 

language interpreters. Detective Jack Slattery was also present 

during the interview. At 0041 hours Jamal was advised of his 

Miranda rights. Jamal understood these rights and he agreed to talk 

to us without a lawyer present. Jamal acknowledged receiving his 

Miranda rights by signing the rights form from which his warnings 

wereread. 

On July 17, 2009, at approximately 9:30 p.m., Detective Beidler arrested 

Defendantandtransported hi111 to police headquarters, N.T. 8/17/10, pp. 217-18. 

Defendant was placed in a holding cell and because police knew Defendant had a 

hearing impairment, police called two certified sign language interpreters. N.T. 

8/18/10,pp. 20-25, 53-56; N.T, 8/17/10,p. 218; Exhs. c~27, C-28, C-29, C-30, 

When the two interpreters arrived they established communication with the 

defendant through the use of.sign language. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 25-28, 56-58; N.T. 

&/17/10, p. 221. Defendant-then agreed to an interview and through the assistance 

of the interpreters gave a voluntary statement to police in a Lieutenant's office, 

which was memorialized in a.signed written statement. N.T. 8/18/10; pp. 28-34, 

58-63; N.T. 8/17/10~ pp. 222,-55; Exhs. C~18, C~.19, C-20, C-21, C-23. That 

statement is as follows: · 

N:T. 8/1'7/10, pp. 104-07, The day after the murderySlater said he received a 

gang.sign threatening his life. N.T. 8/17/10, p, ll2. 
·------------·---····-- ... --··-··-· ... --··----·--·-··---··--···-·. 

7 

Bxh. G-23. After the fot~rview, Detective Beidler photographed the areas of 

Defendant's body where he indicated he-was injured. N.t. 8/l7I10, pp. 256-59; 

Signed'Jamal Sm,ith,7/18/09, 5:l(i a.m, 

I have reviewed my statement as summarized and typed by 

Detective Greg Beidler of the Bristol Township Police Department. 

I find the .facts contained in this statement to be a. true, correct, and 

accurate accounting of my statement to him. I gave and signed this 

statement voluntarily without promise, threat or duress. · 

Jamal stated that he did not intend to kill the guy when he initially 

approached the jeep. He only intended on getting some money from the white male. . 

Jamal stated that at the .' time ofthe incident he was wearing a light 

brown shirt and.light graylong shorts; Jamal statedthathe did have 

blood on his shorts but his shirt did not have any blood onit. Jamal 

did not know what happened to the clothes he 'Was wearing at the 

time but he thinks that his brother may have thrown the clothes 

away, 

Jamal then left Cheech and exited the apartment building. After 

leaving the apartment he threwthe knife into a trash dumpster that 

is. in the parking lot in. front. of 800 building. Jamal then tan to his 

grandmother's house at 12,21 Marie Lowe Drive. 

-As they continued to struggle Jamal stabbed the white male in the 

leg and also admitted fa stabbing the. white male in the 'front 

shoulder, -two times in the back and three times in the chest/stomach 

area. Jamal stated that he stabbed the white male so many times 

because he was scared because the guy had tried to stab him ... Jamal 

exited the car and ran upto apaitment·803 where a person he ·knows 

as "Cheech" resides. Afterknocking Qi), Cheech's door, Cheech 

came out into the hallway and the two talked by the laundry room. 

Duringthis conversation Jamal toidCheech that he bad just stabbed 

a white male 01Jt in the parking lot. 

white males- arm preventing the male from stabbing him. As they 

struggled over the knife Jamal turned his backslightly to the White 

male and the white male bit Jamal on the-left back/shoulder blade. 

They continued to struggle over the knife until Jamal was able to 

pull the knife out of the white males hand. In the course of wresting 

the knife out 9f the white male's hand Jamal received a small 

laceration to the web of his left hand. Jamal described the cut as 

small and stated that it bled only alittle bit. 

., ... ······-·--------···· ... .,_ ·----~--~--- . ---.. . ..... . ~ ......... __ ··-·:-·· 
8 

....._ 

'\ 

After hearing this call, on August 13, 2009, Detective O'Keefe executed a second 

search warrant at the defendant's grandmother's.home. N.T. 8/18/10, pp; 170-73. 

On August 8, 2009, while incarcerated at the Bucks County Correctional' Facility 

and awaitingtrial, Defendant called his family. N.T. 8/18110, p.127; Exhs, C--34, 

C-35. Defendant spoke to three people during this call and discussed his 

incarceration, his Upcoming court dates, and told someone to.go into the 

bathroom; Defendant's family then instructed him to stop speaking. Exhs. C-34, 

C-35, Itshould be noted that this call took place by telephone without the 

assistance of interpreters or assistive listening device-equipment, Attimes 

Defendant asked for words to be repeated but he was able to communicate by 

telephone. 

During the trial, Defendant identified Lynch as a prostitute named "Brown 

Sugar." N .T. 8/19/10, pp. 174- 75; Exh. C-68. However, Lynch testified during 

the trial that she isnot a prostitute and did not smoke crack cocaine with Reil. 

N.T. 8/17 /10,.pp. 206.;07. 

Lynch and the defendant discussed Reil while standing alongside of the 800 

building., N.T. 8/17/10, pp. 200, 202; Exh. C~ 1 L Defendant told Lynch that he 

was going to rob Reil and Lynch stated "leave him alone. He doesn't have 

anything. He's homeless. He doesn't have anything." N. T, 8/i 7 /101 pp; 200, 

203, 207. 

Qn August 1 O; 2009, Detective O'Keefe interviewed. Shawna Lynch, another 

resident of the Marion Village Apartment Complex. N.T. _8/18/10, pp. 197-99. 

On July 8, 2009, at approximately 2:30 a.m., Lynch saw Defendant outside of the 

800 building, N.T; 8/17/10, p, 199. Lynch said that Defendant did not live in the 

apartments, hut often hungout there: N.T. 8/17/lO, p. 205. Lynch observed the 

defendant walk around the Jeep and look in the windows. N.T. 8/17 /l 0, pp. 212- 

13. Lynch saw someone in the passenger side ofthe Jeep at that time. N.T. 

8117/lQ, p. 204, 

On July 18, 2009, Bristol Township Police-Department Detective Michael 

Slaughter, who has thirteen years of experience, executeda search warrant at the 

defendant's grandmother's home, i22J Marie Lowe Drive in Bristol Township, 

N.T. 8/18/lO, pp .. 94~97; Exh, C-33. During the search police recovered twelve 

items including a stained reddish maroon thermal long sleeve shirt and pair of 

"blue jean Capri" pants. which were located on the front porch .. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 

97-98; Exhs. C-16, c.:32, C-33. Detective Slaughter described the borne as beirig 

packed with items. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 99-100. Clothing was everywhere and it · was a challenge to clear out each room. N.T..8/18/10, pp. 99-100. 

Exhs, C-24, G-25, C~26. Although Detective Beidler could see a mark on the 

defendant's right chest, he "could not tell how that mark was made." N.T. 

8/17/10, pp. 258~59. 

... , .. _, ... _·-···- .· -·--· ---~ ...... ,.,-,..,.,,,,..,~--- .... _ ..... , 
9 

The victim also had multiple stab woundson.his chest. Exh. C-43. Two wounds 

were located close to the victim's.rightarmpit. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 152-53; Exh, C40. The one wound was located three inches below the victim's right armpit, and 

_penetrated until it hit a rib bone. N,T, 8/18/10, p. 153; Exh. C-40. The other 

wound, the Widest stab wound, penetrated at least four inches deep into the Jobe 

of the victim's tight lung and caused it to collapse. N.T. 8/18/tO, pp: 152-53; 

Exh, C-40. The Victim also had two stabwounds on the left side bf his chest. 

Reil was stabbed twelve timesin the back. N .T. 8/18/10, pp. 146M47; Exhs, C-38, 

C-39,.C-43. Eleven of the.twelve stab wounds on the victim's back.penetrated 

approximately one to two inches until they hit the rib bone, and one stab wound 

penetrated four inches until it wentthrough the chest wall arid into the victim's 

I ung, N .T. 8/18/10, pp. 147-48, Exh. C-43~ 

During the defendant's trial, Jan Hood.M .D.,. a forensic pathologist and expert in 

forensic pathology, testified. Exh. C-42. On July 8, 2009, Dr. Hood performed 

an. autopsy on Reil's body and determined the cause of death to be multiple stab 

wounds. N.T. 8/18110, pp. 139, 163; Exhs. C-43, C-44. Dr. Hood testified that 

Reil was a thin man and that he was approximately six feet tall and weighed one 

hundred and fifty pounds. N:T. 8/18/10, pp. 132, 139~ 144. Dr. Hood found 

eighteen stab wounds and two scratches en the victim's body, N:r. 8/18/10, pp. 

158-59: Exh. C-AJ. 

On August 16, 20101 a jury was.selected, Also on August 16, 2010, counsel filed 

a stipulation, "Jamal Smith has no functional hearing in hls right ear and limited 

ability to hearin his left ear," We note that during every proceeding, Defendant 

was provided with two sign language interpreters. Additionally, onAugust 13, 

2010, Defendant Was afforded the-opportunity to testthe. assistive listening device 

in the courtroom, which he wore. during the entire trial. 

,, 

··'-'- 

On January 14, 2010, the Commonwealth med a Notice or Aggravating 

Circumstances, On January 15, 2010,Defendant was arraigned. OnJune 7, 

2010, Defendant filed an Omnibus Pre· Trial Motion. On June 30~ 20 lO, a hearing 

was held on the pre-trial motions, On July 9, 20l 0, this Court denied Defendant's 

.suppression motion by written order. Prior to trial, the Commonwealth withdrew 

its-intentlcn to seek the death penalty. 

Detective O'Keefe, who was also present during the search on July I~. 2009 •. 

testified that the bathroom had been cleared out, the vanity was empty, and that 

the closet.in the bathroom was completely empty. N.T. 8/J 8/10, p. 174; Exhs, C46, C-47. Detective O'Keefe testified thatonly the bathroom had been cleared 

out and the remaining rooms in the borne appearedthe same asthey had on July 

18, 2009. N.T. 8/1.8110, pp.111-7&; Exhs, C-48, C-49. During this search police 

recovered Defendant's signed library card. N.T. 8/18/10, pp.176~77; Exh. C-50. 

Defendant's photo identification card and other paperwork revealed his address to 

be his grandmother's house. N.T. Sfl8/l 0, pp. 180, 207; Exhs. C-'51, C-52. 

.. . ,.,__, 

•.... · ... ·,····--~-·--- --- . --.. . ·- ... - ... ,,.·.,·,_..,,~ .. ~ ....... --,.-·.-· .. . 
---------·-----·- 

Shutkufski testified that the DNA profiles obtained from the left sleeve, left cuff; 

and right sleeve of the red thermal shirt found on Defendant's frontporch 

matched the DNA profile of the victim, Reil, N.T. 8119/10, pp.16-18. 

Shutkufski further testified that the probability ofrandomly selecting an unrelated 

individual with this combination of DNAtypesis approximately one in 470 

quintillion (470,000,000,000,000,000,000) fromthe Caucasian population, one in 

91 O sextillion (910,000~000,000,000,000,000,000)from the African American 

population, and one in l4 sextillion(l4,000.,0QO,OOO,OOO;OOO,OOO,OOO)fromthe 

Hispanic population. N .T. 8/19/10, pp. 16-17, Sbutkufski further testified that 

Forensic.Scientist, Lisa Shutkufski, an expert.in DNAanalysis, testified during 

the trial. N.T; 8JJ9/1Q, pp, 6-51; Exh, C-62. Shutkufski is a DNA analyst with 

the Pennsylvania State Police; and has over tenyears of-experience, N.T. 8/19/10, 

pp. 6-7. 

Counsel. stipulated that "serology testing was done on the red thermal shirt seized 

by Bristol Township Police Department at 1221 Marie Lowe Drive, The serology 

testing confirmed the presence of blood on the front, back, sleeves, and inside 

cuffsofthe red.thermal shirt seized from 1221 Marie Lowe Drive." N.T. 8/19110, 

p. 5. 

A toxicology report revealed that the victim's blood alcohol concentration was 

0 ;224 %, but no controlled substances were found.in his system. N. T. 8/ 18/1 O; pp, 

162-6\ -Exh. C-45. 

Dr. Hood testified that.all ofthe stab wounds were about one-half inch to threequarters of an inch in length and were made by a knife that had a relatively thin 

blade. N.T. 8/18/10, p. 143. Several ofthe stab wounds had slightly torn ends, 

N.T: 8118/10, p. 143. This is consistent with movement between the knife and the 

victim. NT. 8/18/10, p, 143. Dr. Hood rioted that the stab wound which entered 

the heart was rapidlyfatal, but that the combination of the other wounds would 

haveprovenfatal as the wounds penetrated the victim's chest and punctured his 

lungs and liver. N.T. 8/18/l 0, p. 156, 

The victim alsohad a one inch stab wound 011 his right.lower leg, where the knife 

stopped when it.hitthe bone; N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 142-43; Exh, C~36. Additionally, 

Reil had a two to three inch deep stab wound "in his-left middle upper arm area 

which was consistent wfrh a knife enteringand traveling upward and stopping 

when it hit the hone. N.T. 8/18/10, pp .. l44~45, Exh .. C-31. 

Exh, CAL One stab wound penetrated four inches deep into the lower abdomen 

Wall causing a. significant hemorrhage of'the Ieftliverlobe amounting to 

approximately twenty cubic centimeters (cc), N.T: 8/18/10, pp. 154-55; Exh, C41. Additionally, the most forceful and rapidly fatal stab wound was over the 

breast bone; where penetration went straight backwards, through the bone, and 

into the heart, N.T, 8/18/lO, p. 155; Exh. C-41. 

•, ···-~--·-· .,_ .. ,~---· .. ·-- .. , ...... -~ .... ,_ ,' _,.,. _ ........ _~~-·.·-····,·· ···-~· .... - .. 
11 

Defendant testified during the trial. N.T. 8119/10, pp. 157-201. Defendant denied 

killing Reil and stated that a ''Blo.od" gang member by the name of Corey Talley 

a.k.a, Corey Mills committed the murder and the following is the defendant's 

version ofthe events. N.T. 8/19/10, pp. 159, J63-64, 192. He said he was 

hanging cut at the 800 building, with Slater and his girlfriend drinking and 

smoking but they had to go to the hospltal becausetheir daughter got injured. 

RT. 8/19/10, pp. 1.65·66. He said he stayed behind and was drinking a beer when 

Mills approached him and told him he wanted to show him something. N.T. 

8119/10, pp. 159--60., 166-67. Mills told him: that he stabbed someone while trying 

to rob him andshowed him the body that had fallen out of the white Jeep. N.T, 

8/19/lO, pp. 160-61, 163. He checked the man's neck to see iflle was alive. N.T. 

8/19/10, p. T6L Mill~ threatened to kill hi111 and his family if.he told anyone. 

N. T. 8/19110, p, J63. further, afterhe was threatened, he went to Slater's 

apartment building and told Slater in the laundry room about what had happened, 

N.T. 8/19/1 O,.pp . .167, 194-96. He said that Mills fellowedhim home that night 

and again threatened him. on his front porch. N.T; 8/19/l 0, pp. 168-70 .. Mills 

then took off his shirt and left it on the front porch. N.T. 8/19/10, p. 170; Exh, C32, On the night of his arrest he initially told police that Mills committed the 

murder, butlater toldpolice he did it because he was scared for his safety and the 

Detective Fuhrman, an expert in fingerprint andpalm print analysis and 

.identlfication, testified during the trial, N.T: 8/19/10, pp. 52, 62; Exh. C-63. 

Detective Fuhrman testified as to the presence of Defendant's fingerprints and 

palm print, 'The defendant's fingerprints and palm print were found on the 

exterior passenger side of'the Jeep, to the left of the passenger door's handle. 

N.T, 8/19/10, pp. 83"86, 94-100; 103; Exhs, C-66, C,.69, The defendant's 

fingerprints were also found on the interior window ofthe Jeep's driver side door 

and on the frontright fender oftheBMW. N.T. 8/19/10, pp. Sl, 86-87, 9'.2-94, 

100~101, lOJ; Exhs~ C-54, C.;55, C-56, C-65, C-67. 

Shutkufski also tested the shirt for the presence of Defendant's DNA and found 

other portions where the-defendant's DNAcould notbe excluded. N.T. 8/19/10, 

p, 20. · Shutlrnfski explained that. ifsomeone was. Wearing ah undershirt under the 

red thermal shirt or if the red thermal shirt, had. been washed the amount of DNA 

found on the shirt would be reduced. N.T. 8/19/10, p, 47. 

Shutkufski also testified that the DNAprofiles found on the left sleeve, left cuff, 

and right sleeve of the red thermal. shirt were consistent with a mixture of DNA. 

N.T. 811'9ll 0, p. I 8. She opined that this isnot unusual because itis common for 

multiple sources to come into contact with one item, N. T. 8/J 9/10, .p. 18. 

Shutkufski also testified that the I>NA profile found on another portion the left 

cuff was not a mixture and fr was consistent with the vfotim's·DNA. N.T. 

8/19/lOl p. 19. 

since there are only six billion people in the world, this figure is larger than the 

world's population. N,T. 8/19/10, p. 17. 

.-.....,. 

--- - ~- - . --·-··-·, -·----- -----· · ·-- ...... , ·.-- .. ·----·--·-· ....,...... __ 

\.,~. 
··-··-----·------------··-··-----··········· ·---- 

12 

i J 8 Pa.C.S. § 370t(a)(l)(i) .. 

. .,,_ ~- 18 Ra,C.S. § 907(~). 

Trial Court Opinion, 6/10/1 i. 

Qn October 14, 2010, Defendant received a total sentence of life imprisonment 

without the possibly of parole .and a concurrent two and one half years to five 

years.in a state correctional facility. N.T. J0/14/lO, p. 25, Specifically, 

Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment for Count 1 J the murder of John 

"Jack" Reil. N.T. 10/14/10, p. 25. Defendant received a concurrent sentence of 

two and one half years to five years for Counf3, Possessing a Criminal 

Instrument. N.T.1011411 O, p. 25. No further penalty was imposed for Count 2, 

Robbery.jisit.merged with Count 1. N.T~ 10/14/10, p; 25. 

On August 20, 201 O; aftera four-day trial, the jury returned .a verdict of guilty on 

the charges .of Second-Degree Murder, Robbery,' and Possessing a Criminal 

. 2 . . . . • . _· .. Instrument. - N. T. 8/20/10, pp. 93M96. 

N.T. 8/19/10, pp. 205-06. 

OnJanuary 11, 2008, the defendant, Jamal Smith, was convicted of 

a retail theft on criminal information 2] 35 of 2007 for an incident 

that occurred inTullytown Borough, Bucks County, Pennsylvania 

onDecember 16, 2006. 

On January 12, 2009~ thedefendaru.Jamal Smith, was convicted of 

robbery on criminal information 7203. of 2008 for an incident that 

occurred in Bristol Township, Bucks County on July 8,2008. The 

robbery did notinvolve a weapon. 

The following stipulations were placed on the record: 

safety of his family, N.T. $/19/10, pp. 171-73. After the interview, the 

interpreters did not go over his statement with him, but instead were playing on 

their phones. N:T. 8/19/10, p. 182. He was popping pills and high.during the 

interview. N. T. 8/19/10, pp. l89-90. During the recorded call from the prison, he 

was telling his uncle to get money and crack out ofthe bathroom. N.T. 8/19/10, 

p, 197; He admitted to seeingShawna Lynch the hight of the murder, but stated 

that he did not tell her that he was going to rob someone and she did not see him 

circle around the Jeep. N.T. 8119110, pp. 175~76. He confirmed that the day after 

the murder he was riding around the apartment complex on Mills' motorcycle. 

N.T, 8/19/10, pp. 177~79. 

\.~.· 

·-·· ---- . . -~ .-.--. ·--·-·· .. ·---~-- . . ·~·-· .,.,., ;. .. · · ····~ 
13 

Pursuant to the Court order directing the tiling of'a statement pursuant to 

Pa.RApp.Pro, 1925(b), notice ishereby given Pursuant to Pa.R.App.Pro. \ . ....._. 

.Pursuant to Pa.RAP. 1925(c)(4) as follows, verbatim; 

appellant's staternentwaswithdrawn, N:T. 3/28/16, pp; 43, 53. 

On April 15, 2016, the appellant's PCR.A counsel, Stuart Wikler, flied. a Statement 

N.T. 2/9/16, pp. 9-10. It should be noted that.the issue with respect to suppression of the 

[Second.] the counsel was ineffective under the 6th and l4tb Amendments 

to the United States Constitution, in Article 1, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania 

Constitution, for not discovering and not removing the influence of'the 

defendant's family, which exercised undue influence on the. defendant to avoid 

presenting a defense that he acted in.self-defense when hekilled the victim. 

[First.] the counsel was ineffective under the 6th and 14th Amendments to 

the United States Constitution, in Article 1, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania 

Constitution, for not presenting a defense based on the victim having tried to rob 

the defendant causing the defendant to use a knifein self-defense against the 

victim resulting in the victim's death. 

The appellant relies on the following grounds for his.PCRA Petition: 

II. STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PA.:R.APP.PRO. 192S(c)(4) 

of Appeal to the Superior Court. 

2016,the appellant's PCRA Petition was deriied, On April 7, 2016, the appellant filed a Notice 

On February 8, 2016, the appellant filed the Second Motion to Amend Defendant's PCRA 

Petition, and PCRA hearings were held on February 9t 2016 and March 28, 2016. On April 1, 

O.n March 4, 20 \3, the appellant filed a Motion to Amend Defendant's PCRA Petition. 

appellant's Petition for Allowance of Appeal. 

judgment of sentence. On September 13, 2012, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania denied the 

of Appeal to the Superior Court. On March 28, 2012, the Superior Court affirmed this Court's 

No post-sentence motionswere filed. On October 15,2010, the-appellant filed a Notice 

........... ~ ·-~·--~·-·~ --~·-·. --·-·-. . ·. ~· _ . _ , 
-----·- ---- ·-------------------------·-·-··-----------··--··--·-······--·--·--·-·---·-···-····-···---·-···-·--···· 

14 

2012), 

·and [the] scope of review plenary." Commonwealth v. Ford, 44 A.3d 1190, 1194 (Pa. Super. Ct. 

record." Id: ''Where the petitioner raises questions oflaw,[theJ standard of review is de novo 

Superior Court "may affirm a PCRA court's decision on any grounds if it is supported by the 

of record, viewed in thelightmost.favorable to the prevailing party atthetriallevel." Id. The 

omitted). "[The] scope of review is limited to. the findings of the PCRA court and the evidence 

legal error." Commonwealth. v. Burkett, 5 A.3d 1260, 1267 (PaSuper, Ct. 2010) (citations 

"whether the determination of the PCRA court is supported by evidence of record and is free of 

The standard of review regarding the dismissal ofa petition forpost-conviction relief'is 

·;~- Pa,RA.P. l925(c)(4 ). The appellant's PCRA counsel of record filed such a statement of intent 

under Rule 1925(¢)(4)J and weconcur thatno meritorious issuessupport.theappellant's appeal. 

Ina criminal case, counselmayfile.of record and serveonthejudge a statement 

ofintent to file an Anders!McClendon brief'in Heu of filing a Statement. If, upon 

review of the Anders/McClendon brief, the appellate court believes that there are 

arguably meritorious issues for review, those issues will not be waived; instead, 

the appellate court may remand forthe filing ofa Statement, a supplemental 

opinion pursuant to Rule 1925(a), or both. Upon remand, the trial court may, but 

is not-required to, replace appellant's counsel. 

provides as follows: 

withdraw in lieu of filing a statement of matters complained of on appeal. Specifically the Rule 

Pa.R,A.P. 1925(c)(4) permits counsel in a criminal case to file a statement of intent to 

III. DISCUSSION 

1925(c)(4) thatthe undersigned will be fillinga no meritletterand and petition to 

withdraw as counsel pursuant to Commonwealth v. Finley, 479 A.2d 568 (Pa .. 

Super. 1984) and its progeny with the Superior Court, andtherefore will not be 

filing a statement of matters complained of, due to the lack of any meritorious 

issues supporting the Defendant's appeal. 

............... - ... ,-~---- .-·-~ .. ~ .. ; .. ."···---~- - ...... ~· . . .. .. ·._ ..... _._- ·-··· 
·-------·----·-·------- 

15 

To prevail in a claim of ineffective assistance-of counsel, a petitioner must 

overcome the presumption that counsel is effective by establishing a.11 of the 

following three .elements, as set forth in Commonwealth v. Pierce, 515 Pa. 153, 

527 A.2d 973, 975-76 (1987): (l) the underlying legal claim has arguable merit; 

(2) counsel had no. reasonable basis for his or her action or inaction; and (3) the 

petitioner suffered prejudice because ofcounsel's ineffectiveness. With regard to 

the.second, reasonable basis prong; we do not question whether there were other 

mote logical courses of action which counsel could. have pursued; rather, we must 

examine whether counsel 's decisions bad any reasonable basis; We VJiU conclude 

that counsel's chosen strategy lacked a reasonable basis· only if Appellant proves 

that an alternative not chosen offered a potential for success substantially greater 

thanthe course actually pursued. To establish the third, prejudice prong, the 

from ... [ijneffective assistance of counsel which, in the circumstances ofthe particular case, so 

undermined the truth-determining precessthatno reliable adjudication of guilt or innocence 

could have taken place." 

which requires the petitioner to "plead and. prove ... (t]hat the conviction or sentence resulted 

arising from ineffective assistance of counsel are cognizable under § 9543(a)(2)(ii) ofthe PCRA, 

Here, both claims of the appellant concern ineffective assistance of counsel. Claims 

ruled on the merits of the issue."42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(a)(2}. 

highest appellate court in which the petitioner could have had review as a matter of right has 

[conviction proceeding," 42 Pa.C.S. § 9544(b), An issue has been previously litigated jf "the 

but failed· to do so before trial, at trial, during unitary review, on appeal or in a prior state posq42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(a)(3) and (4). An issue has been waived "ff the petitioner could have raised it 

appeal could not have been the result of any rational, strategic or tactical decision by counsel." 

that "the failure to litigate the issue prior to or during trial, during unitary review or on direct 

claims of error raised in the PCRA petition "[have] not been previously litigated or wai ved" and 

circumstances enumerated in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(a)(2). The Petitioner must also establishthat the 

the. evidence that his et her conviction; or sentence resulted from one or more of the 

To be eligible for PCRA relief, a petitioner must.plead and prove by a preponderance of 

' ',. •·.•·"" .. .,~, .. --· - .... -...__'£., -.~.,~~·~--,•,- ... .,.,..~,.....,._.,, ··• • ~•.••< ...... -,.-,.-. • •·· - .• •, •·• .... - ··-----•, 
--··-----··---·-·--- 

16 

A. Yes. 

-Q Do you remember telling the jury that you did not kill John Rdl? 

A. Yes. 

Q. Do you remembertestifyingin.the.jury trial back in 201 O? 

Q.. Jamal, are you now admitting that you killed John Reil? 

A Yeah, but.I didn't really mean to kin John Reil. 

BY MR SWEENEY: 

hearing, the appellant admitted that he lied to thejury at trial: 

the killing to his lawyers, and they were Unable to present such a defense. During the PCRA 

evidence to satisfy the three requirements set forth in Pierce. The appellant voluntarily denied 

resulting in the victim's death." The appellant's claim fails because he did not present sufficient 

·~ on the victim having tried to rob him causing him to use a knife in self-defense against the victim 

The appellant claims that his counsel was "ineffective for not presenting a defense based 

the car and "moving." N.T. 3/Q.8/16, p. 21. 

continued. N.T. 3/28/16, pp, 14, 21. When the fight ended, the victim was "standing" "outside" 

to get money from.the appellant.who then tried to get his money back; N.T. 3128/16, p. 14. 

After the victim stabbed, kicked and bit.the appellant, the appellant stabbed him, and the fight 

brandished a knife and directed him to get in the car. N. T. 3/28/16, p. 20. The victim managed 

According to the-appellant, he waswalking on the street, and the victim came up to him, 

During the PCRA hearing, theappellant provided a new version of the incident. 

omitted}. 

Commonwealth v. Paddy, 15 A.3d 431, 442 (Pa. 2011) (internal citations and quotations 

petitioner must show that there is a reasonable .probability that the outcome of the 

proceedings would have been different but for counsel's ineffectiveness. 

,,., C ,-•"'•'" ' ............ ~ .. ·-. • -- .--- ' • • ...... ' • ...;.., __ ..;._•••••••• .. ;..·--..-,---•u• n-•""•- • '' · . .._ 
- --··· .. ··- .. ·· .... ·--------·--- 

17 

\._. asserted by the appellant during the PCRA hearing. Even if.counsel had presented such a 

As demonstrated above, trial counsel had .a: reasonable basis not to present the defense 

adopted the statement he .gave tothe police, N.T .. 3/28/16, p. 63. 

counsel, that Cory Tally killed the victim. N.T. 3/28/16, ~ .. .'30. Mr. Williams testified that the 

appellant never admitted to: killing the victim. N .T. 3128/16, p .. 48. Furthermore, Mr. Williams 

told the appellant that "the story that he told the police might.lead to a better-verdict," N.T. 

3/28/16, p, 49. .. John Fioravanti, Jr., the appellant's co-counsel, testified that the appellantnever 

N .T. 3/28/16~ p. 27. Before the pre-trial hearing, the appellant told Keith Williams, his trial 

N.T. 3/28/16, pp. 40-41. When the appellant.was asked why he lied, he said, "I was scared." 

A Yes. 

Q. And that, in fact, was also alie, correct'? 

A. Yes. 

Q. .Do you remember telling thejury that Cory Tally threatened you and your 

family? 

A. Alie, yes. 

Q. Whenyou told the jury that Cory Tally killed John Reil, was that the truth 

or was that a lie? 

A. YeS: 

Q. Do you remember telling the jury that Cory Tally killed John ReH? 

A. Yes. 

Q. When you told the jury that you did not kill John Reil, was that a lie? 

A. Could you repeat that? 

Q, So when you told the jury that, that was a He? 

- - ,,. ,··.., ·~ ._ ·- -._-. 
18 

cooperative as she could be underthe circumstances," N.T. 3/28/16, p. 51, Moreover, when the 

·, 

......... 

killed the victim and might have influenced-her son because of'this belief she "tried to be as 

According to Mr. Williams, although the appellant'smother did- net.believe that her son 

is meritless. 

presented to support these bald assertions, Thus, without more, the appellant' s underlying claim 

anything when she visited the appellant at prison. 'N.T. 3/28/l6, P .. 36. No evidence was 

Besides this alleged threat, he testified that his mother said she "could get the reward money" if 

the appellant lied. N.T. 3/28/16, p. 31. He testified that his mother also told him not to say 

him and told him that.ifhe told the truth during trial, she would kill his kids. N.T. 3/28/16, p, 32.. 

removing theundueinfluence ofhis family. According tothe appellant, his mother threatened 

111e appellant next claims that his counsel was ineffective for not discovering and not 

appellants account given inthe PCRA hearing. 

evidence supported the appellant's statement given to the police, but it contradicted the 

fight ended, Reil was "standing" "outside" the car and "moving." N.T. 3/28/16, p. 21. Thus the 

N .T. 8/18/1 Q, p. 153. However, the appellant testified during- the PCRA hearing that when the 

it to collapse, N. T. 8/18/10, p.153; 'One stab wound went rhrou ghrhe bone and into the heart. 

One stab wound penetrated fourinches into the lowerlobe of the victim's right lung and caused 

wounds and two scratches which were found on the victim's body. N.T. 8/18/10, pp. 158-59. 

800 building, the appellant stopped Lynch when she walked up, and told her that he was going to 

rob ReH. N. T. 8/17110, pp. 199,,.200. During the trial, Dr. Hood described the eighteen stab 

evidence presented at trial. For example, Shawna Lynch, a resident of the Marion Village 

Apartment.Complex, testified that in the early morning hours of July 81h of 2009, on the side of 

defense, the outcome of the proceedings would _not have been differentdue.to the overwhelming 

\ .,">,,.,,,_•· 
19 

BYTHE COURT, 

·vflt.tu /II o2, o It,,, DATE: · . · rr' · / 

and therefore, the appeal should be denied; 

For the foregoing reasons, we respectfully submit that the issues raised are without merit, 

IV. CONCLUSION 

failed to admh to killing the victim. N.T. 3/28/16, p. 42. 

at.trial. N.T. 3/28116, p. 49. However, when the appellant met with his lawyer? alone, he still 

appellant met with his Iawyers with his mother present, she did not tell the appellant what to say 

r 

' 

""·-···· 

,, ...... ·, .•. ··.. · .... • . . . . . ----· .. ---·.•• . ~ ·"'. ~ ··-···-. --·-·---~....;-~--' ..... _