Opinion ID: 3019708
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: the trial court erred by permitting the

Text: testimony of two pre-teenage boys; (2) his counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he did not seek a pre-trial determination of the boys’ competency to testify and did not object to their competency during the trial; and (3) the evidence was insufficient and the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Commonwealth v. Medina, No. 3885, slip op. at 1 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 31, 1995). The Superior Court held the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction. Id. at 19. The Superior Court summarized the evidence as follows: In addition to the identification testimony given by Michael Toro, there was circumstantial evidence tending to connect appellant with the 16 homicide. Not only was appellant present at or near the scene of the stabbing, but he had in his possession a knife similar to that used by the killer and had previously vowed to use it to kill somebody. Finally, there was testimony that he had been observed going through the victim’s pockets after the stabbing. Thus, even though the offending knife had not been found and despite the sometimes less than positive identification by Michael Toro, a jury, having found the Commonwealth’s evidence credible, could find beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant was the killer. Id. at 19-20. The Superior Court also held “there is at least arguable merit to appellant’s contention that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the competency of the juvenile, Michael Toro.” Id. at 20. The Superior Court remanded “for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s claim that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.” Id. at 24. The Superior Court instructed that “[i]f trial counsel’s assistance is found to be effective, the judgment of sentence may be reimposed. If counsel’s assistance was ineffective, however, a new trial must be granted.” Id.