Opinion ID: 2056434
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Use of Common Practice Questions

Text: Finally, Appellant complains that the trial court improperly denied his brother, Cory Galvin, the opportunity to testify at trial regarding the common practice of Appellant and others while in Appellant's apartment regarding heroin use. Specifically, Galvin would have testified that he had known Kolesnik for over 10 years; that he, the victim, and Appellant were friends; and that they had used heroin with each other on some occasions. According to Appellant, the testimony of his brother established a pattern or habit of individuals using heroin in Appellant's apartment, which would have supported his theory that Kolesnik died alone in Appellant's apartment as a result of suicide. The Commonwealth responds that, at the time such testimony was elicited, the Commonwealth objected, and defense counsel specifically acknowledged that the testimony was not being introduced to establish a common practice or habit: THE COURT: I have another question. Where is this going? The decedent's drug use has been well established, as has the defendant's drug use and this witness's drug use, what is the import of this testimony.    MR. WELSH: The question is that this was a drug house where [Appellant] would go get drugs and the others would stay alone in the room while he obtained the drugs  MR. BALDWIN: I object to that because the question is what happened on January 31st  January 30th and 31st. This witness was locked up, he doesn't know. MR. WELSH: It wasn't any different in November or October when he wasn't locked up than when he was locked up. THE COURT: Is it your contention that there was a practice that may have existed prior to this guy's incarceration that you can establish what happened in January through the use of that? MR WELSH: No, we have other witnesses for January. N.T., 8/9/07, at 698-699. Therefore, the Commonwealth emphasizes that trial counsel specifically denied that the purpose of the testimony was to establish a continuing course of behavior that would establish a common practice. Thus, the Commonwealth stresses that Appellant cannot now claim trial court error when trial counsel failed to seek admission of the testimony on the basis now asserted. Based upon the above testimony, the trial court determined, inter alia, that Appellant was not attempting to establish a routine practice through the testimony of his brother. Appellant stated that other witnesses would establish that routine during the relevant time. Furthermore the court concluded that, even if Appellant had tried to establish a habit through his brother, drug use in a person's house is not the type of habit or routine that would be admissible under the rules of evidence. Thus, the court rejected this claim. Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence 406 establishes that evidence of the habit of a person or a routine practice is relevant to establish that the conduct of a person on a particular occasion was consistent with such habit. Evidence of the habit of a person or of routine practice of an organization, whether corroborated or not and regardless of the presence of eyewitnesses, is relevant to prove that the conduct of the person or organization on a particular occasion was in conformity with the habit or routine practice. Pa.R.E. 406. Admission of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court and will not be overturned unless the trial court commits an abuse of that discretion. Commonwealth v. Minerd, 562 Pa. 46, 54, 753 A.2d 225, 229 (2000). One must object, however, to the particular basis on which to admit or deny such evidence. Commonwealth v. Scarborough, 491 Pa. 300, 319, 421 A.2d 147, 156 (1980); Pa.R.A.P. 302. We agree with the Commonwealth that the basis on which Appellant challenges the trial court's refusal to admit the evidence of a purported habit or routine practice was not offered as a basis for the admission of the evidence by trial counsel during the hearing. Thus, the trial court properly rejected Appellant's argument.