Opinion
J-S51026-19 No. 638 MDA 2019
10-07-2019
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. DOUGLAS MARTIN SHUFFLER Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered April 2, 2019
In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-21-CR-0002528-2018 BEFORE: PANELLA, P.J., GANTMAN, P.J.E., and MUSMANNO, J. MEMORANDUM BY GANTMAN, P.J.E.:
Appellant, Douglas Martin Shuffler, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas, following his jury trial convictions for indecent exposure and open lewdness. We affirm.
18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3127(a), 5901, respectively. --------
In its opinion, the trial court correctly set forth the relevant facts and most of the procedural history of this case. Therefore, we have no need to restate them. We add that on April 24, 2019, the court ordered Appellant to file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). After the court granted an extension, Appellant timely filed a Rule 1925(b) statement on May 17, 2019.
Appellant raises the following issue for our review:
DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR WHEN IT CONCLUDED THAT
THE VERDICT WAS NOT AGAINST THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE SO AS TO SHOCK [ONE'S] SENSE OF JUSTICE?(Appellant's Brief at 6).
After a thorough review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and the well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable Jessica E. Brewbaker, we conclude Appellant's issue merits no relief. The trial court opinion discusses and properly disposes of the question presented. ( See Trial Court Opinion, filed May 30, 2019, at 3-5) (finding: jury had opportunity to observe Victim and found Victim's testimony credible; video surveillance evidence corroborated Victim's testimony that she spoke briefly with Appellant during encounter and then quickly backed away from his car and locked herself in her vehicle; video further supported Victim's testimony that Appellant left scene immediately after encounter with Victim, Victim followed Appellant to obtain license plate number, and returned to motel to report incident; Victim's written statement to police after incident was consistent with her trial testimony; Appellant's written statement to police corroborated Victim's testimony; jury verdict did not shock court's sense of justice, and court properly denied Appellant's challenge to weight of evidence). The record supports the rationale of the trial court. Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the trial court opinion.
Judgment of sentence affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 10/7/2019
Image materials not available for display.