accumulation claim in Pennsylvania

2025We have determined that the majority of these claims are either waived or lack arguable merit. “[W]here claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim.” Commonwealth v. Sattazahn, 952 A.2d 640, 671 (Pa. 2008).

2024"Yet, when the failure of individual claims is based upon a lack of prejudice, the cumulative prejudice arising from those individual claims may properly be considered." Id. at 1205-06 (citations omitted); see Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108, 1150 (Pa. 2012) ("if multiple instances of deficient performance are found, the assessment of prejudice properly may be 32 premised upon cumulation."). "[W]here ineffectiveness claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim." Commonwealth v. Smith, 181A.3d1168, 1187 (Pa. Super.), app. denied, 193 A.3d 3

2025Id. “[T]o the extent [PCRA] claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim.” Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121, 161 (Pa. 2012). “[N]o number of failed [ineffective assistance of counsel] claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Saylor, 308 A.3d 869, 879 (Pa. Super. 2024) (citation omitted).

2025Since we have found no arguable merit to Appellant’s first allegation of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, we will not assess the cumulative impact of the second hypothesized error; “to the extent claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim.” Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121, 161 (Pa. 2012). “[B]oilerplate allegations and bald assertions of … ensuing prejudice cannot satisfy a petitioner’s burden to prove that counsel was ineffective.” Paddy, 15 A.3d at 443 . - 15 - J-S30040-25 In sum, the appellate allegations of trial counsel’s ineff

2026See Smith, 181 A.3d at 1187 .

2022Commonwealth v. Smith, 181 A.3d 1168, 1187 (Pa. Super. 2018) (citations omitted).

2025However, “[w]hen the failure of individual [PCRA] claims is grounded in lack of prejudice, ... then the cumulative prejudice from those individual claims may properly be assessed.” Koehler, 36 A.3d at 161 - 14 - J-S28030-25 “[W]here a claimant has failed to prove prejudice as the result of any individual errors, he cannot prevail on a cumulative effect claim unless he demonstrates how the particular cumulation requires a different analysis.” Commonwealth v. Hutchinson, 25 A.3d 277, 351-52 (Pa. 2011) (citation omitted).

2025Id. “[T]o the extent [PCRA] claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim.” Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121, 161 (Pa. 2012). “[N]o number of failed [ineffective assistance of counsel] claims may collectively warrant relief if they fail to do so individually.” Commonwealth v. Saylor, 308 A.3d 869, 879 (Pa. Super. 2024) (citation omitted).

2024"Yet, when the failure of individual claims is based upon a lack of prejudice, the cumulative prejudice arising from those individual claims may properly be considered." Id. at 1205-06 (citations omitted); see Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108, 1150 (Pa. 2012) ("if multiple instances of deficient performance are found, the assessment of prejudice properly may be 32 premised upon cumulation."). "[W]here ineffectiveness claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim." Commonwealth v. Smith, 181A.3d1168, 1187 (Pa. Super.), app. denied, 193 A.3d 3

2024"Yet, when the failure of individual claims is based upon a lack of prejudice, the cumulative prejudice arising from those individual claims may properly be considered." Id. at 1205-06 (citations omitted); see Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108, 1150 (Pa. 2012) ("if multiple instances of deficient performance are found, the assessment of prejudice properly may be 32 premised upon cumulation."). "[W]here ineffectiveness claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim." Commonwealth v. Smith, 181A.3d1168, 1187 (Pa. Super.), app. denied, 193 A.3d 3

2021See Commonwealth v. Stevens, 739 A.2d 507, 530 (Pa. 1999).

2017See Commonwealth v. Busanet, 54 A.3d 35, 75 (Pa. 2012) (noting that where ineffectiveness claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim).

2016Thus, to the extent claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim.” Commonwealth v. Hanible, 30 A.3d 426, 483 (Pa.2011).

2015Commonwealth v. Bomar, 104 A.3d 1179, 1216 (Pa. 2014) (quoting Commonwealth v. Washington, 927 A.2d 586, 617 (Pa. 2007)).

2015See Commonwealth v. Sneed, 45 A.3d 1096, 1117 (Pa. 2012) (holding that “where claims are rejected for lack of arguable merit, there is no basis for an accumulation claim[,]” and, similarly, that there is no basis for an accumulation claim where individual claims have been disposed of for an absence of prejudice).

2015Commonwealth v. Bomar, 104 A.3d 1179, 1216 (Pa. 2014) (quoting Commonwealth v. Washington, 927 A.2d 586, 617 (Pa. 2007)).