Opinion
J-S63035-16 No. 3338 EDA 2015
09-27-2016
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. KNOWLEDGE BROWN Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the PCRA Order October 19, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0003358-2008 BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., SHOGAN, J., and FITZGERALD, J. JUDGMENT ORDER BY FITZGERALD, J.:
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
Appellant, Knowledge Brown, appeals from the order entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas denying, after an evidentiary hearing, his Post Conviction Relief Act ("PCRA") petition. We affirm.
We adopt the facts and procedural history set forth in the PCRA court's opinion. See PCRA Ct. Op., 10/19/15, at 1-5. Appellant raises the following issues on appeal:
We note the jury trial commenced on May 5, 2009, not May 4th as indicated by the PCRA court.
1. Did not the lower court err in dismissing the [PCRA p]etition, as the factual basis for its conclusion is not supported by the record and because trial counsel, in a case where identification evidence was the sole basis for conviction, failed to use powerful impeachment evidence to
contradict the critical prosecution eyewitness and failed to secure a cautionary instruction?Appellant's Brief at 6. Appellant contends trial counsel was ineffective for failing to use impeachment evidence to contradict the prosecution eyewitness, Renea Moore, or secure a cautionary instruction. He claims he was entitled to relief based upon these cumulative errors.
2. Is not [A]ppellant entitled to relief under a "cumulative error" standard?
We note that in the amended PCRA petition, Appellant raised several issues that have been abandoned on appeal. See Am. Counseled Pet. for Post Conviction Relief, 10/16/14, at 1-2 (unpaginated).
This Court has stated:
Our standard and scope of review for the denial of a PCRA petition is well-settled.
Commonwealth v. Charleston , 94 A.3d 1012, 1018-19 (Pa. Super. 2014) (some citations omitted).[A]n appellate court reviews the PCRA court's findings of fact to determine whether they are supported by the record, and reviews its conclusions of law to determine whether they are free from legal error. The scope of review is limited to the findings of the PCRA court and the evidence of record, viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party at the trial level.
After careful review of the record, the parties' briefs, and the decision by the Honorable Barbara A. McDermott, we affirm on the basis of the PCRA court's opinion. See PCRA Ct. Op. at 5-10 (holding (1) trial counsel challenged the reliability of Moore's identification of Appellant before and during trial and (2) a cautionary eyewitness instruction was inappropriate where the record indicates Moore clearly viewed Appellant at the time of the shooting).
We note the citation to page sixty-one of the April 30, 2009 notes of testimony is inaccurate. The quoted statement appears on page sixty-three. See PCRA Ct. Op. at 9 n.9. On page ten of the PCRA court's opinion, the court refers to Moore's observation of Appellant and victim arguing, citing pages 121-22. This testimony appears in the notes of testimony on pages 111-12. See N.T., 5/5/09, at 111-12.
On direct appeal, this Court opined: "Based upon all of the evidence presented, we conclude that the trial court correctly determined that Moore had an independent basis for identifying [Appellant], and that her identification of [him] was therefore reliable." Commonwealth v. Brown , 2424 EDA 2009 at 10 (Pa. Super. July 8, 2011) (unpublished memorandum).
Given our resolution of the first issue raised on appeal, we need not address the issue of whether Appellant is entitled to relief under a "cumulative error" standard. See Commonwealth v. Washington , 927 A.2d 586, 617 (Pa. 2007) (holding "no number of failed claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually").
Accordingly, we affirm the order of the PCRA court.
Order affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 9/27/2016
Image materials not available for display.