Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Wayne A. Smith

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania reviews Wayne A. Smith’s appeal from the dismissal of his Post Conviction Relief Act petition. The Court holds that resentencing counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately object to evidence and argument portraying Smith as a prospective serial killer, including evidence concerning his reading habits and alleged serial-killer fantasies. The Court reverses the PCRA court’s order and remands for a new penalty-phase hearing.

Holdings

1. Evidence that Smith read books about murder or the perfect crime and fantasized about becoming a serial killer was not relevant to whether he should receive death or life imprisonment. It could not be used to prove his already-established intent to kill Jones, and its minimal probative value concerning mitigation was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
2. Resentencing counsel lacked a reasonable basis for failing to properly object to the reading-material and serial-killer evidence and to the prosecutor's repeated references to it.
3. Smith established prejudice because there was a reasonable probability that, absent the improperly admitted and emphasized evidence, at least one juror would have found that the aggravating circumstance did not outweigh the mitigating circumstances and would have imposed life imprisonment rather than death.

Questions Presented

1. Whether resentencing counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately object to and challenge evidence and argument portraying Smith as a serial killer or serial-killer-in-training.
2. Whether the reading-material and serial-killer evidence was relevant and admissible in a capital resentencing proceeding.
3. Whether counsel's failure to object created a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have declined to find that the aggravating circumstance outweighed the mitigating circumstances.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded