Com. v Johnson, F. (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S32003-14 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. FLORENCE JOHNSON Appellant No. 2025 WDA 2012 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence November 1, 2012 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0002577-2012 BEFORE: PANELLA, J., DONOHUE, J., and ALLEN, J. MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, J. FILED JUNE 25, 2014 Appellant, Florence Johnson, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered on November 1, 2012, by the Honorable David R. Cashman, Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. After careful review, we affirm. On a Saturday in early February 2012, Wayne Owens helped Johnson paint her apartment living room. See N.T., Trial, 8/8/12, at 8, 15. After he finished painting, Owens cleaned up, took off his shoes, and sat down on the couch to have a drink. See id., at 8. Johnson then approached Owens claiming she saw scratches on his back, accused him of cheating, and threatened to kill him. See id., at 9. At that time, Owens had on a shortsleeved undershirt and a long-sleeved sweatshirt. See id. Johnson then ran into the kitchen, returned with a knife, and lunged at Owens in an attempt to stab him. See id., at 9, 11. Owens blocked the J-S32003-14 attack with his arm and began to bleed profusely. See id., at 9. Owens then left the apartment, without his coat or shoes, and encountered neighbors in the hallway, who called the paramedics and police. See id. Owens went to Mercy Hospital, where he received 14 stitches in his arm. See id., at 11-12. Following a bench trial on August 8, 2012, Johnson was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, terroristic threats, and recklessly endangering another person. At sentencing on November 1, 2012, Johnson follows. On appeal, Johnson claims the verdict is against the weight of the and incredible. Our standard of review for a challenge to the weight of the evidence is well settled. We may not substitute our judgment for that of the fact finder, who is free to believe all, part, or none of the evidence and to determine the credibility of the witnesses. See Commonwealth v. Diggs, 949 A.2d 873, 879 (2008). The trial court may only award a new trial where the verdict is Id. A rendition, causes the trial judge to lose his breath, temporarily, and causes him to almost fall from the bench, then it is truly shocking to the judicial -2- J-S32003-14 Commonwealth v. Cruz, 919 A.2d 279, 282 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citation omitted). Our review is thus limited to whether the trial court Diggs, 949 A.2d at 879. In considering all evidence in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the trial court found the facts to be as stated above. and supported by the evidence. The trial court found the verdict certainly did not shock any sense of justice. We find no abuse of discretion with this conclusion. Judgment of sentence affirmed. Jurisdiction relinquished. Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 6/25/2014 -3- J-S32003-14 -4-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
