three prongs test in Pennsylvania

2021Commonwealth v. Medina, 209 A.3d 992, 1000 (Pa. Super. 2019) (internal brackets, citations, and quotation marks omitted) (some additional ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

2019Since “[a] failure to satisfy any of the three prongs of this test requires rejection of a claim of ineffective assistance[,]” id., we need not address Appellant’s extensive argument about the prejudice caused him by the Commonwealth’s cross-examination of Myers.

2023In the context of an ineffectiveness claim, counsel’s failure to request a cautionary instruction regarding evidence of other crimes or prior bad acts does not constitute per se ineffectiveness; “[r]ather, in order to obtain relief under such a claim, a defendant must still satisfy each of the three prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.” Commonwealth v. Buehl, 540 Pa. 493 , 658 A.2d 771, 778 (1995) (plurality).

2023In the context of an ineffectiveness claim, counsel’s failure to request a cautionary instruction regarding evidence of other crimes or prior bad acts does not constitute per se ineffectiveness; “[r]ather, in order to obtain relief under such a claim, a defendant must still satisfy each of the three prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.” Commonwealth v. Buehl, 540 Pa. 493 , 658 A.2d 771, 778 (1995) (plurality).

2025“In the context of an ineffectiveness claim, counsel’s failure to request a cautionary instruction regarding evidence of other crimes or prior bad acts - 17 - J-A11023-25 does not constitute per se ineffectiveness; rather, in order to obtain relief under such a claim, a defendant must still satisfy each of the three prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.” Commonwealth v. Weiss, 622 Pa. 663, 716 , 81 A.3d 767, 798 (2013) (citation and quotation marks omitted), abrogated on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Yale, 665 Pa. 635 , 249 A.3d 1001 (2021).

2025“In the context of an ineffectiveness claim, counsel’s failure to request a cautionary instruction regarding evidence of other crimes or prior bad acts - 17 - J-A11023-25 does not constitute per se ineffectiveness; rather, in order to obtain relief under such a claim, a defendant must still satisfy each of the three prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel.” Commonwealth v. Weiss, 622 Pa. 663, 716 , 81 A.3d 767, 798 (2013) (citation and quotation marks omitted), abrogated on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Yale, 665 Pa. 635 , 249 A.3d 1001 (2021).

2016A petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must prove the three prongs of the test established in Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973, 975 (Pa. 1987): “(1) the underlying claim has arguable merit; (2) no reasonable basis existed for counsel's actions or failure to act; and (3) [the petitioner] suffered prejudice as a result of counsel's error.” Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795, 804 (Pa. 2014) -5- J-S64026-16 (citations omitted).4 Counsel is presumed effective, and a petitioner bears the burden of proving otherwise.

2016A petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must establish the three prongs of the test from Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973 (Pa. 1987): “(1) the underlying claim has arguable merit; (2) no reasonable basis existed for counsel’s actions or failure to act; and (3) [petitioner] suffered prejudice as a result of counsel’s error.” Fears, 86 A.3d at 804 (citations omitted).

2017See Commonwealth v. Cam Ly, 980 A.2d 61, 73 (Pa. 2009) (“A failure to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test for ineffectiveness requires rejection of the claim.”) (citation omitted).

2014“A failure to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test for ineffectiveness requires rejection of the claim.” Commonwealth v. Ly, 980 A.2d 61, 73 (Pa. 2009).

2015The failure by the petitioner “to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test for ineffectiveness requires rejection of the claim.” Collins, 957 A.2d at 244 .

2015The failure by the petitioner “to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test for ineffectiveness requires rejection of the claim.” Collins, 957 A.2d at 244 .

2025Commonwealth v. Cook, 952 A.2d 594, 614 (Pa. 2008).

2010“A failure to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test for ineffectiveness requires rejection of the claim.” Id.

2021While he purports to raise claims related to ineffective assistance of counsel, Appellant has further waived these claims by failing to develop any of the three prongs of a claim of ineffective assistance, as discussed infra. See Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795, 804 (Pa. Super. 2014).

2016A petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must prove the three prongs of the test established in Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973, 975 (Pa. 1987): “(1) the underlying claim has arguable merit; (2) no reasonable basis existed for counsel's actions or failure to act; and (3) [the petitioner] suffered prejudice as a result of counsel's error.” Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795, 804 (Pa. 2014) -5- J-S64026-16 (citations omitted).4 Counsel is presumed effective, and a petitioner bears the burden of proving otherwise.

2017If the defendant fails to satisfy any one of the three prongs of the test, the claim of ineffective assistance must be denied, See Pierce, 786 A.2d at 221 -22.

2016See Pierce, 786 A.2d at 221-22 .

2025See id.

2024Here, Appellant failed to discuss the reasonable basis and prejudice prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel in her brief.5 See Appellant’s Brief at 16-18; see also Sandusky, 203 A.3d at 1043 (stating the three prongs of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel).

2024See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Pond, supra. See also, Commonwealth v. Wharton, 811 A.2d 978, 986 (Pa. 2002). 2 Claims of ineffectiveness by PCRA counsel may be raised for the first time on appeal.

2010See e.g., Commonwealth v. Wharton, 571 Pa. 85, 98-99 , 811 A.2d 978, 986 (2002).

2019Commonwealth v. Medina, 209 A.3d 992, 996, 1000 (Pa. Super. 2019) (internal brackets, citations, and quotation marks omitted) (some additional formatting), reargument denied (July 17, 2019). “[C]ounsel will not be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim[,]” including where “there [is] no reasonable basis for trial counsel to object . . . , counsel will not be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless objection.” Commonwealth v. Spotz, 896 A.2d 1191, 1211, 1247 (Pa. 2006).

2019Medina, 209 A.3d at 1000 (internal brackets, citations, and quotation marks omitted) (some additional formatting). “[C]ounsel will not be deemed ineffective for failing to raise a meritless claim.” Commonwealth v. Spotz, 896 A.2d 1191, 1211 (Pa. 2006). -7- J-S42045-19 For Appellant’s first ineffectiveness claim – that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to utilize Ms. Jones’s prior inconsistent statements to impeach her, Appellant’s Brief at 10 – neither Appellant’s amended PCRA petition nor his brief to this Court plead that Appellant suffered “prejudice, to the effect that there was a

2019Chapel, 426 A.2d 1123, 1129 (Pa. 1981) (hereinafter “Valley Forge”) (“[W]here, as in the present case, the status quo sought to be altered has continued undisturbed for more than sixty years, the merits of the litigation cannot be reached until completion of discovery and full hearing, it is not clear that the petitioner’s claim is purely speculative and the three prongs of the test for issuance of a preliminary injunction have been satisfied, it is unreasonable to deny injunctive relief pending a definitive ruling on the merits.”7).

2019Chapel, 426 A.2d 1123, 1129 (Pa. 1981) (hereinafter “Valley Forge”) (“[W]here, as in the present case, the status quo sought to be altered has continued undisturbed for more than sixty years, the merits of the litigation cannot be reached until completion of discovery and full hearing, it is not clear that the petitioner’s claim is purely speculative and the three prongs of the test for issuance of a preliminary injunction have been satisfied, it is unreasonable to deny injunctive relief pending a definitive ruling on the merits.”7).

2022Commonwealth v. Koehler, 36 A.3d 121, 132 (Pa. 2012).

2022Koehler, 36 A.3d at 132 .

2026Commonwealth v. Martin, 5 A.3d 177, 183 (Pa. 2010).

2025“To demonstrate prejudice, the petitioner must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceedings would have been different.” Commonwealth v. Spotz, 624 Pa. 4, 33 , 84 A.3d 294, 312 (2014) (citation and quotation marks omitted).

2023Further, “the decision whether to seek a jury instruction implicates a matter of trial strategy. . . . [T]rial counsel may reasonably decline to request a limiting instruction with regard to prior criminal misconduct where such an instruction might have served to emphasize what might otherwise have gone relatively unnoticed by the jury.” Id. (citations and quotation marks omitted); see also Hutchinson, 25 A.3d at 306 (concluding that defense counsel who did not request a limiting instruction regarding the defendant’s prior bad acts was not ineffective because “[u]nder these circumstances, an i

2023Commonwealth v. Bishop, 266 A.3d 56, 62 (Pa. Super. 2021) (citations omitted).

2022A reasonable probability is a probability [ ] sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome of the proceeding.” Commonwealth v. Daniels, 104 A.3d 267, 281 (Pa. 2014) (internal citations, quotation marks, and brackets omitted). -8- J-S02041-22 Failure to establish any of the three prongs of this test is fatal to the claim.

2020See Commonwealth v. Williams, 899 A.2d 1060, 1063 (Pa. 2006) (stating that “[f]ailure to address any prong of the [ineffectiveness] test will defeat an ineffectiveness claim.”); see also Franklin, supra. Accordingly, White’s first two claims fail. ____________________________________________ 3 In support of his claim, White cites Commonwealth v. Carrasquillo, 115 A.3d 1284, 1285, 1292 (Pa. 2015) (holding that “a bare assertion of innocence is not, in and of itself, a sufficient reason” to require a court to grant a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea, and explaining that the “innocenc

2020See Commonwealth v. Williams, 899 A.2d 1060, 1063 (Pa. 2006) (stating that “[f]ailure to address any prong of the [ineffectiveness] test will defeat an ineffectiveness claim.”); see also Franklin, supra. Accordingly, White’s first two claims fail. ____________________________________________ 3 In support of his claim, White cites Commonwealth v. Carrasquillo, 115 A.3d 1284, 1285, 1292 (Pa. 2015) (holding that “a bare assertion of innocence is not, in and of itself, a sufficient reason” to require a court to grant a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea, and explaining that the “innocenc

2020See Commonwealth v. Williams, 899 A.2d 1060, 1063 (Pa. 2006) (stating that “[f]ailure to address any prong of the [ineffectiveness] test will defeat an ineffectiveness claim.”); see also Franklin, supra. Accordingly, White’s first two claims fail. ____________________________________________ 3 In support of his claim, White cites Commonwealth v. Carrasquillo, 115 A.3d 1284, 1285, 1292 (Pa. 2015) (holding that “a bare assertion of innocence is not, in and of itself, a sufficient reason” to require a court to grant a presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea, and explaining that the “innocenc

2018See Wholaver, 177 A.3d at 144 .