Summary
This is a Pennsylvania Superior Court opinion affirming the appellant's jury convictions for multiple counts of robbery. The court addresses three evidentiary issues raised on appeal, ruling that cell phone GPS data and license plate reader records are not hearsay, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting lay testimony regarding these records or a deputy's observation of the defendant's courtroom behavior.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in admitting Sprint cell‑phone location records as hearsay or expert testimony.
- Whether the trial court erred in admitting license‑plate reader data as hearsay or expert testimony.
- Whether the trial court erred in admitting Deputy Landis's testimony about Grubbs's courtroom behavior as prejudicial or irrelevant.
Holdings
- The trial court did not err; the cell‑phone records are not hearsay and the testimony was lay, not expert.
- The trial court did not err; the LPR data is not hearsay and the detective’s testimony was lay, not expert.
- The trial court did not err; the testimony was relevant, not unduly prejudicial, and any prejudice was harmless.
Key quotations
“Hearsay is defined as a statement that “(1) the declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or hearing; and (2) a party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement.”” (at 1-7)
“GPS data obtained from cellphone records is not hearsay. As such, GPS location data cannot constitute hearsay because Rule 801 is clear that “a statement is a written or oral assertion of a person.”” (at 1-7)
Factual background
Grubbs robbed three 7‑Eleven stores in Bucks County between October 2020 and January 2021, using a gun to threaten employees and stealing cash and merchandise. The robberies were captured on video. The Commonwealth introduced Sprint cell‑phone location records and license‑plate reader data, and testimony from a deputy about Grubbs's evasive behavior during trial.
Procedural history
The trial court sentenced Grubbs to two consecutive terms of ten to twenty years for robbery‑theft offenses. Grubbs filed post‑sentence motions which were denied, and he appealed the evidentiary rulings concerning cell‑phone records, license‑plate reader data, and testimony of a deputy about his courtroom behavior.