The Pennsylvania Superior Court has affirmed the judgment of sentence against Kyle Hill, who was convicted of Drug Delivery Resulting in Death and related charges in Cumberland County. The case stems from the death of Lindsay Bowen, who died from fentanyl toxicity in May 2022.
Background of the Case
The incident occurred on May 11, 2022, when police responded to a possible overdose at an apartment in Silver Spring Township. They found Bowen unresponsive in her bedroom. Despite attempts to revive her, she was pronounced dead at the scene. Investigations revealed that Bowen had used heroin the previous night, which her fiancé, Randy Jacobs, believed was supplied by Hill and his roommate, Michaella Weidler.
Evidence gathered during the investigation played a crucial role in the case. A used “money bag” design glassine baggie was found in Bowen’s cigarette pack. A search warrant executed at Hill’s apartment led to the discovery of unused baggies with the same design, 2.4 grams of fentanyl, and a digital scale. Hill admitted to selling methamphetamine but denied selling heroin. Weidler, however, testified that she and Hill jointly sold both methamphetamine and heroin to Bowen. She also stated that Hill ordered the drugs online and packaged them in the “money bag” baggies, and that the “heroin” they were selling was actually fentanyl.
Text messages between Hill, Weidler, and Bowen were key pieces of evidence. These messages revealed two drug transactions on May 10, 2022. The first involved a morning sale facilitated by Weidler, where Bowen paid Hill via Cash App. The second transaction, later that evening, involved Bowen coordinating a heroin purchase with both Weidler and Hill, ultimately leading to Bowen entering Hill’s apartment to inject the drugs. Cash App records confirmed these transactions. Furthermore, a Ring camera recorded Hill leaving packages for Bowen to pick up and Bowen entering his apartment.
Hill was arrested in July 2022 and charged with several offenses, including Drug Delivery Resulting in Death, Criminal Conspiracy, and Involuntary Manslaughter. He was represented by counsel, Jacob M. Jividen, Esq., initially, and later by Allen Welch, Esq. A jury trial was held in October 2023, where Hill was convicted on all counts. He chose to represent himself at sentencing, which occurred on December 19, 2023, resulting in an aggregate sentence of thirteen to twenty-six years’ imprisonment. He later requested counsel for a post-sentence motion, and Shannon Costa, Esq., was appointed.
Hill filed a post-sentence motion, which raised several issues, including the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The trial court held hearings on the ineffectiveness claims, and ultimately denied the post-sentence motion in its entirety. Hill then filed an appeal to the Superior Court.
Arguments on Appeal
Hill raised several arguments on appeal:
* Sufficiency of the Evidence: Hill argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he delivered the fentanyl that caused Bowen’s death. He claimed that the evidence pointed to Weidler as the sole person responsible.
* Weight of the Evidence: Hill contended that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. He argued that the evidence showed he was merely a drug user and that Weidler was the primary actor in the drug sales.
* Brady Violations: Hill alleged that the prosecution violated the *Brady* rule by failing to disclose or destroying certain evidence, including items found in trash bags, body camera footage, and extraction data from a cell phone.
* Suppression Motion: Hill claimed that the trial court erred in not reconsidering its denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during the search of his apartment.
* Sentencing: Hill argued that the trial court failed to consider mitigating factors during sentencing.
* Bail: Hill claimed the trial court abused its discretion by denying his request for bail modification.
* Ineffectiveness of Counsel: Hill raised several claims regarding the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel.
Court’s Decision
The Superior Court addressed each of Hill’s arguments:
Sufficiency of the Evidence: The court found that the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to support Hill’s convictions. The court pointed to text messages, Cash App records, and Weidler’s testimony, which showed that Hill was involved in selling controlled substances to Bowen. The court concluded that even if Weidler delivered the fatal dose, Hill was still criminally liable as a co-conspirator.
Weight of the Evidence: The court upheld the trial court’s decision, stating that it would not substitute its judgment for that of the fact-finder. The court found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
Brady Violations: The court rejected Hill’s claims of *Brady* violations.
* Trash Bags: The court found that the items in the trash bags were not exculpatory and would not have changed the outcome of the trial.
* Body Camera Footage: The court found that Hill did not show that the missing body camera footage contained exculpatory evidence. The court also noted that there was no evidence that the prosecution acted in bad faith.
* Jacobs’s Cell Phone Data: The court ruled that Hill did not establish that the cell phone data contained material evidence that was exculpatory or could have been used for impeachment.
Suppression Motion: The court affirmed the trial court’s decision not to reconsider its denial of the suppression motion, as Hill did not raise the specific arguments in his original suppression motion.
Sentencing: The court found that Hill had not raised a substantial question for review regarding the sentencing and that the trial court properly exercised its discretion.
Bail: The court found that the trial court did not err in declining to modify Hill’s bail obligation, as he had been given a sentence of more than a decade of incarceration.
Ineffectiveness of Counsel: The court determined that Hill’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel should be deferred to the PCRA process. The court found that the trial court’s colloquy regarding Hill’s waiver of his right to seek PCRA review was deficient.
Conclusion
The Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence against Kyle Hill on all counts. The court found that the evidence supported the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.