Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/558bv.pdf
Page Number: 219

58 

BEARD  v.  KINDLER 

Opinion of the Court 

postverdict  motions  in  1984  had  not  abused  his  discretion. 
In  October  1991—more  than  seven  years  after  the  jury’s 
death recommendation—the court formally imposed the 
death  sentence.  Commonwealth  v.  Kindler,  No.  2747  etc. 
(Ct. Common Pleas, Feb. 28, 1992), App. 66–70. 

Kindler appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in de­
clining  to  address  the  merits  of  his  postverdict  motions. 
The  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court  afﬁrmed.  Kindler,  536 
Pa., at 232–234, 639 A. 2d, at 3.  That court recognized that 
“trial courts, when faced with a defendant in fugitive status, 
.  .  .  have  every  right  to  fashion  an  appropriate  response[,] 
which  can  include  the  dismissal  of  pending  post-verdict  mo­
tions.”  Id.,  at  233,  639  A.  2d,  at  3.  The  court  then  deter­
mined  that  the  trial  court’s  decision  to  dismiss  Kindler’s 
claims  fell  within  its  authority:  The  “dismiss[al]  [of]  the 
post-verdict  motions  was  a  reasonable  response  to  Appel­
lant’s  ‘ﬂouting’  of  the  authority  of  the  court.”  Id.,  at  233– 
234,  639  A.  2d,  at  3.  Under  Pennsylvania’s  fugitive  forfeit­
ure  law,  the  court  concluded,  Kindler’s  case  therefore  came 
to  it  “without  any  allegations  of  error  (direct  or  collateral) 
preserved.”  Id., at 234, 639 A. 2d, at 4. 

The  Pennsylvania  Supreme  Court  nonetheless  conducted 
the  “limited  review”  mandated  for  death  sentences  under 
Pennsylvania  law.  Under  that  review,  the  court  was  re­
quired to conﬁrm that the evidence was sufﬁcient to support 
the conviction of ﬁrst-degree murder and at least one aggra­
vating  factor,  and  that  the  sentence  was  not  excessive,  dis­
proportionate,  or  the  product  of  passion  or  prejudice.  Id., 
at  234–235,  639  A.  2d,  at  4.  Satisﬁed  that  Kindler’s  convic­
tion  met  these  standards,  the  court  afﬁrmed  his  conviction 
and  sentence.  We  denied  certiorari.  Kindler  v.  Pennsyl­
vania, 513 U. S. 933 (1994). 

On  state  habeas,  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  rejected 
Kindler’s claims.  That court held that the Pennsylvania Su­
preme  Court  had  already  ruled  that  Kindler’s  escape  for­
feited all claims challenging his conviction and sentence that