In this case, Milton James was convicted of first-degree murder in 1969 after a trial in which the prosecution made comments implying bias against homosexuals, invoking the memory of an unrelated slain officer, and attacking witness credibility. James later petitioned under the Post Conviction Hearing Act, arguing that both trial counsel (for failing to object to the remarks) and appellate counsel (for not raising trial counsel's ineffectiveness) provided ineffective assistance. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the PCHA court's grant of a new appeal and reversed the judgment of sentence, holding that the prosecutor's comments were clearly improper and prejudicial, that trial counsel had no reasonable basis for failing to object, and that appellate counsel was likewise ineffective under the PCHA for not raising the issue. The court rejected arguments that the claim was waived or that a trial court lacked authority to address appellate counsel's effectiveness. It granted a new trial without reaching other issues such as self-defense instructions or confession voluntariness.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Andrew Rogers, who was convicted in 1973 of burglary, aggravated robbery, and first- and second-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment following the 1972 killings of two women. On appeal, Rogers contended that his confessions should have been suppressed due to unnecessary delay between arrest and arraignment, that the statements were involuntary, that references to his suppression-hearing testimony violated his Fifth Amendment rights, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the initial detailed oral statement was given shortly after arrival at police headquarters with no causal link to the later delay, that credibility findings supported voluntariness, that any limited reference to invocation of the Fifth Amendment was not reversible error, and that ample evidence including the confessions supported the verdict.

criminal lawprocedure