Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Mark Newton Spotz, Appellant

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the denial of Post Conviction Relief Act relief from Mark Spotz's first-degree murder conviction and death sentence for the 1995 abduction and murder of Betty Amstutz in Cumberland County, the last of four killings during a three-day crime spree. The court resolved the claims visible in the opinion (Issues 1-11 and part of Issue 12 of twenty raised) by holding them previously litigated, waived, barred by the categorical rule that a pro se defendant cannot raise his own ineffectiveness, undeveloped, or meritless, including challenges to the consolidation of trials, the waiver of counsel, competency, a claimed conflict of interest, the exclusion of a jailhouse confession implicating another suspect, Brady, prosecutorial misconduct, jury instructions, and the use of prior homicide and burglary convictions as aggravators. The court reaffirmed that burglary is per se a crime of violence for the Section 9711(d)(9) aggravator and that Chambers v. Mississippi does not support routine due process challenges to correct hearsay rulings. Chief Justice Castille, concurring, joined the majority but attacked the federally financed Federal Defender's abusive briefing practices in state capital collateral proceedings and urged procedural reforms; Justice Saylor, concurring in part, joined much of the majority but would permit colloquy inquiry into a defendant's reasons for waiving counsel, found some prosecutorial comments improper though non-prejudicial, disassociated himself from the majority's Kelly dictum, and would refer the Defender's conduct for disciplinary review.