FREE CONSULTATIONS

Email or Call (215) 564-0644

    Pennsylvania Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) Petition – Newly Discovered Evidence

    There are different issues which may be raised in a defendant’s Post Conviction Relief Act Petition, as provided in 42 Pennsylvania Consolidated Statute Section 9541, et. seq., which include:

    • ineffective assistance of counsel;
    • prosecutorial misconduct (i.e., a Brady violation);
    • unlawful guilty plea;
    • newly discovered evidence; or
    • an illegal sentence (i.e., falls outside the maximum allowed under Pennsylvania law).

    This article will discuss PCRA petitions based on newly discovered evidence. For ineffective assistance of counsel, see Pennsylvania Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) Petition – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (IAC) During Plea Bargaining.

    Newly Discovered Evidence

    A court can grant post conviction relief on the basis of newly discovered evidence if the defendant proves the “unavailability at the time of trial of exculpatory evidence that has subsequently become available and would have changed the outcome of the trial if it had been introduced.” See Pennsylvania Post Conviction Relief Act § 9543 (a)(2)(vi).

    In other words, a defendant must establish 3 things pursuant to the statute:

    1. the unavailability of the evidence at the time of trial,
    2. the evidence is exculpatory in nature, and
    3. the outcome of the trial would have been different, i.e., the defendant would not have been convicted.

    Unavailability of the Evidence at Trial

    Unavailable evidence has to be evidence that could not be obtained prior to trial by reasonable diligence and is discovered after trial. Consider the following scenario. A defendant is convicted of homicide at trial. Throughout trial, the defendant maintains that there was a witness who witnessed the murder, and that the witness saw another person shoot the victim. However, this witness could not be located at the time of trial. The defendant’s attorney tried to find the witness by interviewing his friends and family, but to no avail. The trial could not be delayed, and the defendant is convicted at trial.

    After the defendant is convicted, the witness finally comes forward. The witness was afraid and went in hiding after witnessing the murder committed by another person, not the defendant. Based on this newly discovered evidence, the court may grant post conviction relief.

    Exculpatory Nature of Evidence

    Newly discovered evidence is exculpatory when it tends “to establish defendant’s innocence of the crimes charged, as differentiated from that which, although favorable, is merely collateral or impeaching.” What that means is that newly discovered evidence cannot be exculpatory if there was other evidence that proved defendant shot the victim. For example, if there were other witnesses that testified at trial that they saw the defendant shoot the victim, then this newly discovered evidence is not exculpatory even though it is favorable. On the other hand, if the defendant was convicted of homicide based on circumstantial evidence, then this newly discovered evidence is exculpatory.

    Different Outcome

    The last prong the defendant has to establish is that if the newly discovered exculpatory evidence was available at the time of trial, there would have been a different outcome.

    Help Filing a PCRA Petition in Philadelphia, PA

    If you have questions about filing a PCRA petition for a loved one after trial, David S. Nenner, a criminal defense lawyer in Philadelphia, can help. Mr. Nenner has been a criminal defense lawyer since 1985.  It is important to have an experienced criminal trial lawyer who can identify issues for appeal to review your case. Call (215) 564-0644 for a free consultation.

    Disclaimer: This website does not create any attorney-client relationship or provide legal advice. Our lawyers provide legal advice only after accepting a case. It is imperative that any action taken is done on advice of counsel. Read full disclaimer below

    David S. Nenner

    "Top Rated Criminal Defense Lawyer"
    (2015-2022)

    MURDER, Att. Murder CHARGES – Negotiated Significantly Lower prison sentence (Feb. 2022, PHILA)

    Mr. Anderson faced murder and attempted murder charges after an incident in Northeast Philadelphia involving the shooting death of Anderson’s sister’s boyfriend and the boyfriend’s roommate who was shot 5 times and survived. The decedent had previously beaten the...

    Att. MURDER CHARGES – NOT GUILTY JURY VERDICT (April 2022, PHILA)

    The Commonwealth alleged that Mr. Shelton shot and seriously injured a male in a bar in North Philadelphia called Circles. There was video of the shooting which happened outside the bar. However, Mr. Nenner presented witnesses who testified that the person in the bar...

    MURDER, Robbery CHARGES – NOT GUILTY JURY VERDICT (MAY 2021, PHILA)

    Mr. Nenner's client was charged with multiple crimes (murder, conspiracy, aggravated assault, robbery, etc.) after a shooting death occurred at a gambling house in North Philadelphia. At trial, Mr. Nenner successfully presented a self-defense argument and convinced...

    MURDER CHARGE – NOT GUILTY JURY VERDICT (MAY 2021, PHILA)

    Mr. Nenner’s client was charged with murder and gun charges in Philadelphia. The client was accused of shooting and killing another male on Arch Street near the 5600 block of Ithan Street in Philadelphia. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty after deliberating...

    Drug Possession Case – Motion to Suppress Granted

    Mr. Nenner presented evidence that to show that the traffic stop was a pretextual stop. The officer had no reason to pull the car over. The judge agreed and suppressed the evidence. As a result, the prosecution withdrew the charges.

    Sentencing for 1st Degree Murder in PA

    In this article below we discuss sentencing for 1st degree murder cases in Pennsylvania. In later articles, we will discuss sentencing for 2nd and 3rd degree murder cases. If you or a loved one is facing murder charges in Philadelphia or the surrounding counties,...

    Philadelphia Criminal Trials – Evidence Pointing to Another Perpetrator in Drug Possession or Drug Manufacture Cases

    In criminal trials in Philadelphia, one pretty common defense tactic is pointing the finger at another person at trial. This can raise enough doubt to result in a not guilty verdict by the judge or jury that the defendant was not the perpetrator of the crime. Here’s...

    Philadelphia Murder & Gun Possession Cases Increasing in 2021 – A Look at Common Charges & Defenses

    A look at PA criminal law for Murder (1st, 2nd, 3rd Degree), Aggravated Assault, Robbery, Possession of a Firearm, Carrying a Firearm Without a License, Carrying a Firearm in Philadelphia (misdemeanor).

    Pennsylvania Murder Charges, Deceased Person’s Statements Used to Prove Guilt

    Defense Trial Strategies – Excluding Statements That Accuse the Defendant Prosecutors often look to a deceased individual’s statements made prior to a murder to show that the defendant is guilty. These statements may point to a history of violence between the deceased...

    Pennsylvania (State) Drug Charges, Dog Sniffs & Constitutional Law

    Federal and Pennsylvania state courts treat narcotics dog searches differently. So different that the same scenario could result in different outcomes in federal versus state court. For example, a Philadelphia resident is pulled over for speeding. During the traffic...