mistake-of-age defense in Pennsylvania

2023Bohonyi, 900 A.2d at 884 (stating, “the Commonwealth bears no ____________________________________________ 35We concur with the trial court that the mistake of age defense was appliable to all of Appellant’s aforementioned convictions except his conviction at 5098-CR-2019 of corruption of minors under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301(a)(1)(i).

2008Commonwealth v. Bohonyi, 900 A.2d 877, 884 (Pa.Super.2006) (emphasis in original). ¶ 14 Based on the aforementioned, we agree with Appellant that he was permitted to present a mistake of age defense to the crime of statutory sexual assault, and once proffered, the burden shifted to the Commonwealth to disprove the defense.

2025See Commonwealth v. A.W.C., 951 A.2d 1174, 1178 (Pa. Super. 2008) (citation omitted).

2023See N.T., 5/20/21, at 211-212; see also 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301(a)(1)(i); 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301(d)(1) (stating, “[w]henever in this section the criminality of conduct depends upon the corruption of a minor whose actual age is under 16 years, it is no defense that the actor did not know the age of the minor or reasonably believed the minor to be older than 18 years”). - 49 - J-A29018-22 burden of proof regarding the defendant’s knowledge of or belief as to the age of the child victim” until the defendant proffers the defense); see also Commonwealth v. A.W.C., 951 A.2d 1174 , 1181 n.5 (Pa. Super. 2008

2025See Colavita, supra. Furthermore, Myers failed to demonstrate how he was prejudiced where the trial court issued the mistake-of-age instruction and clearly instructed the jury that the mistake-of-age defense did not alleviate the Commonwealth’s burden of proof.

2025See Hipps, supra. In his last claim, Myers contends that the PCRA court erred in denying his claim that trial counsel failed to object to the trial court’s instructions on the mistake-of-age defense for IDSI and indecent assault when Myers had not offered such a defense because he exercised his right to remain silent.

2023See Commonwealth v. Fetter, 770 A.2d 762, 768 (Pa. Super. 2001) (stating, in establishing a mistake of age defense, “the victim’s beliefs as to how old she[, or he,] looks [are] irrelevant to [determining a defendant’s] beliefs and knowledge of her[, or his,] actual age”). - 50 - J-A29018-22 The Commonwealth produced no direct evidence that [Appellant] knew that [the victim] was underage[.] The Commonwealth was left with attempting to counter [Appellant’s] mistake of age defense through speculation and strained interpretations of ambiguous events.

2023Commonwealth v. Cottam, 616 A.2d 988, 1000-1001 (Pa. Super. 1992) (citations omitted), appeal denied, 636 A.2d 632 (Pa. 1993); see also Commonwealth v. Scott, 73 A.3d 599, 603 (Pa. Super. 2013). - 48 - J-A29018-22 Section 3102 of the Crimes Code sets forth the mistake of age defense as follows: Except as otherwise provided, whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends on a child being below the age of 14 years, it is no defense that the defendant did not know the age of the child or reasonably believed the child to be the age of 14 years or older.

2023We decline Appellant’s invitation since the jury, as the ultimate fact-finder, while passing on the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence, was free to believe all, part, or none of the evidence. - 62 - J-A29018-22 Commonwealth v. Dunkins, 229 A.3d 622, 631 (Pa. Super. 2020), aff’d, 263 A.3d 247 (Pa. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S.Ct. 1679 (2022).

2023Commonwealth v. Cottam, 616 A.2d 988, 1000-1001 (Pa. Super. 1992) (citations omitted), appeal denied, 636 A.2d 632 (Pa. 1993); see also Commonwealth v. Scott, 73 A.3d 599, 603 (Pa. Super. 2013). - 48 - J-A29018-22 Section 3102 of the Crimes Code sets forth the mistake of age defense as follows: Except as otherwise provided, whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends on a child being below the age of 14 years, it is no defense that the defendant did not know the age of the child or reasonably believed the child to be the age of 14 years or older.