Case Name: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Edmond JACKSON, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2016-05-02
Citations: 158 A.3d 64
Docket Number: No. 595 EAL 2015
Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Edmond JACKSON, Respondent
Judges: Chief Justice Saylor dissents.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 158
Pages: 64–64

Head Matter:
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Edmond JACKSON, Respondent
No. 595 EAL 2015
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
May 2, 2016

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 2nd day of May, 2016, upon review of the Commonwealth's Petition for Allowance of Appeal, we find as follows: The Superior Court reversed the Post Conviction Relief Act ("PCRA") court denying Respondent collateral relief, and remanded, finding the PCRA court should have granted Respondent an evidentiary hearing on his after-discovered evidence claim based on criminal charges filed against a trial witness. However, to be entitled to relief based upon an after-discovered evidence claim, a petitioner must, inter alia, establish that the proposed after-discovered evidence is "producible and admissible." Commonwealth v. Smith, 540, A.2d 246, 263 (Pa. 1988). Here, Respondent's after-discovered evidence is inadmissible because the evidence consists only of criminal charges against a witness, not convictions. See Commonwealth v. Taylor, 381 A.2d 418, 419 (Pa. 1977) ("[t]he veracity of a witness may not be impeached by evidence of prior arrests which have not led to convictions"). The Superior Court thus erred in reversing the PCRA court order on this basis, and in remanding for an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, the order of the Superior Court is REVERSED, and the PCRA court's order denying collateral relief on the basis of after-discovered evidence is REINSTATED.
Chief Justice Saylor dissents.