Opinion ID: 1533871
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 20

Heading: Trial Counsel Failed to Call Character Witnesses

Text: Appellant argues that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to present the character testimony provided at Appellant's first trial. Appellant reasons that the failure of his counsel to call character witnesses was without reasonable basis and, therefore, ineffective. The Commonwealth counters by pointing-out that, [a] failure to call a witness is not per se ineffective assistance of counsel for such decision usually involves matters of trial strategy. Commonwealth v. Auker, 545 Pa. 521, 681 A.2d 1305, 1319 (1996). Indeed, in this case it appears that defense counsel in the second trial studied the first trial and believed that Appellant's case was harmed when he presented character testimony because the prosecutor was able to respond with testimony that Appellant had a reputation as not being law-abiding. N.T. 10/29/93 at 951-960. During the post-sentence motion hearing, defense counsel explained that he did not present character evidence at the second trial because he wanted to prevent the prosecution from presenting contrary evidence. N.T. 12/20/99 at 27-28. Defense counsel testified as follows: Q. During the first trial, you submitted and produced several people to testify as to the defendant's good character; isn't that correct? A. That's correct. Q. During the second trial, you produced no good character testimony; isn't that correct? A. That is also true. Q. Was there a rational or reasonable basis, what was your basis for failing to produce any character witnesses? A. During the cross-examination of the character witnesses, Mr. Casey brought up specific acts of conduct that were was designed to impeach the accuracy of the character witnesses' testimony; and based upon that impeachment, I did not want to open the door a second time to Miss Rubino (the prosecutor) impeaching the character witnesses with other acts of misconduct on the part of Mr. Ogrod which would have nullified the impact of the character testimony. N.T. 12/20/99 at 27-28 (emphasis added). Because it is clear that defense counsel had a reasonable strategic basis for not calling character witnesses at the second trial, counsel was not ineffective by failing to call the witnesses. Porter, 728 A.2d at 895-896.