Court Opinion

ID: 9717493
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 07:04:35.302146+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:53.482788
License: Public Domain

ZAPPALA, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority but write separately to enunciate my rationale. As the majority notes, and I concur, if the missing witnesses had testified at the evidentiary hearing as alleged, sufficient evidence would have been presented to establish a lack of any reasonable excuse why their testimony was not presented at the original trial. The lack of this favorable testimony would undoubtedly have prejudiced the appellee’s case. Thus, if the missing witnesses had testified at the evidentiary hearing the appellee would have met his burden of proof with regard to a claim of ineffectiveness of trial counsel. However, Officer Sherbondy failed to appear at the evidentiary hearing and Lori Morford did not substantiate the favorable testimony alluded to by the appellee in his memorandum in support of a new trial. Accordingly, the appellee presented insufficient evidence to meet his burden. For this reason, I would reverse the Superior Court and rein*338state the judgment of sentence of the Court of Common Pleas.