Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-0596-2003; 2211-2002COMMONWEALTH VS. BARRY STABLE1N IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CP-21-CR-0596-2003 CP-21-CR-2211-2002 IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925 On December 30, 2003, the defendant was sentenced to various terms of probation following a jury trial at which he had been found guilty of two counts of harassment, two counts of stalking, and a count of loitering and prowling at nighttime. The defendant has appealed. IN accordance with the direction of this court, he filed a statement of matters complained of on appeal. The defendant's somewhat rambling statement complains that his attorney failed to advance certain arguments at trial. The statement also contains the defendant's own arguments as to why he should have been found not guilty. IN essence, he complains that he was wrongfully accused by a woman with whom he had had a cordial relationship and that his counsel did not properly advance arguments to effectively make this point. A review of the record, however, will indicate that this defense was ably advanced at trial and that defendant's counsel, Bryan S. Walk, Esquire, provided competent and effective representation. 1 Rather than attempting to make any sense out of the defendant's post-appeal statement, we will treat it as a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. IN reviewing the sufficiency of evidence, we are required to review the evidence and all reasonable inferences which can be drawn therefrom in a light most favorable to the Mr. Walk has since withdrawn his appearance and the defendant now proceeds pro se. CP-21-CR-0596, 2003, CP-21-CR-2211-2002 Commonwealth. Com. v. Pasley, 743 A.2d 521 (Pa. Super. 1999). The testimony indicated that the defendant, Barry Stablein, first met the victim, Beverly Frey, when he was a patient at Polyclinic Hospital during the spring of 2001. She was one of the nurses on his floor. Ms. Frey took pity on the defendant as he was not well liked by the other nurses and had no visitors. Despite a lengthy stay in the hospital, he was discharged without ceremony, Ms. Frey being the only person who acknowledged him. Shortly after his discharge, Mr. Stablein called Ms. Frey several times at work. He invited her to lunch saying that he wanted to thank her for her kindness while he was at the hospital. At first, Ms. Frey declined, indicating that she was in a relationship with another man. Eventually, however, she agreed to go to lunch with him. Approximately a week later, the two again had lunch. It was then that Ms. Frey began to feel uncomfortable with the relationship. She did not respond to a telephone message from Mr. Stablein inviting her to dinner. Over the next several months, Mr. Stablein called her but Ms. Frey would not answer the phone. She felt that by ignoring him he would come to understand that she did not want to have a continuing relationship with him. N.T. 42. Eventually, Ms. Frey began receiving letters from the defendant. N.T. 44. In one of the letters, Mr. Stablein indicated "I am a very assertive person by nature. And it takes a lot for me to back off." N.T. 45. At one point, Ms. Frey telephoned the defendant and left a message asking him to stop "bothering" her. N.T. 54. By January of 2002, Ms. Frey was receiving more phone calls. Mr. Stablein came to her place of employment. There were times when he came to her house when she would not answer the door. Finally, on one occasion when he visited her home, she summoned the police. They instructed Mr. Stablein to cease his contact with Ms. Frey. The very next day, he contacted her by phone and threatened to forward a derogatory letter to the 2 CP-21-CR-0596, 2003, CP-21-CR-2211-2002 Board of Nursing and to her nursing supervisor. Ms. Frey indicated that Mr. Stablein could send whatever letter he wanted but she did not want to have further contact with him. Nonetheless, he again came to her place of work. He brought her some soup and a note. Several days later he returned to her place of work with some crackers. N.T. 59. He informed her that he had been taking handgun lessons. Toward the end of January of 2002, Mr. Stablein again came to Ms. Frey's home. He came into her kitchen taking her by surprise. She instructed him to leave and he complied. He was observed, however, sometime later in Ms. Frey's side yard building a snowman. Eventually Ms. Frey enlisted the help of her friend, Larry Singleton, who called Mr. Stablein and told him to stop bothering Ms. Frey. Mr. Singleton threatened that he would go to legal authorities. N.T. 66. This appeared to have little effect as Mr. Stablein again contacted Ms. Frey insisting that she speak with him. She agreed as it appeared that Mr. Stablein was now threatening Mr. Singleton. In May of 2002, Ms. Frey was visiting an old friend, Larry Waraksa. They had been watching television into the evening and Ms. Frey was preparing to leave. Ms. Frey's dog began to bark which prompted her to look out the front door. As she looked outside, she saw Mr. Stablein's car parked in the street and, moments later, saw Mr. Stablein in the driveway walking away from Mr. Waraksa's house. Because it was dark, Ms. Frey was not absolutely certain that it was Mr. Stablein. Mr. Waraksa, in an attempt to verify the identity of the individual, decided to follow him. By that time, Mr. Stablein had entered his vehicle and was beginning to drive away. Mr. Waraksa pulled his car out and followed. Following a series of evasive maneuvers, Mr. Stablein inadvertently entered a dead-end street. Mr. Waraksa blocked the street with his vehicle. At that point, Mr. Waraksa was able to see that the individual in the other vehicle was Mr. Stablein who was dressed in black pants, a black jacket and was wearing a black wig. Mr. 3 CP-21-CR-0596, 2003, CP-21-CR-2211-2002 Waraksa then realized that this was the same person that he had seen driving around Ms. Frey's home on numerous occasions and at all hours. Mr. Waraksa observed Mr. Stablein toss the wig into his car, lock his car and run into the woods. Sometime later, Mr. Stablein called the police from a business known as Stephenson's Flowers which was a short distance away from where he had abandoned his car. Lt. Carl Meiss of the Lower Allen Township Police Department responded to Stephenson's Flowers. Mr. Stablein reported that somebody had tried to run him over with a car. He was unable to relate, however, where the incident occurred. He did not seem know how he had come to Stephenson's Flowers. Though he had admitted to having driven his car to the area, he claimed not to remember where he had left it. The offense of loitering and prowling at nighttime is made out when the Commonwealth proves that the defendant maliciously loitered or prowled at nighttime around a dwelling home. In this case, the jury would have no difficultly in concluding that Mr. Stablein was at Mr. Waraksa's residence at nighttime spying on Ms. Frey. This type of conduct has been held to be a violation of the statute. See Com. v. Bulicki, 518 A.2d 577 (Pa. Super. 1986). The offense of stalking occurs where one engages in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which include both communications as well as following a person without proper authority, all under circumstances which demonstrate an intent to cause substantial emotional distress to such other person. After Ms. Frey spurned his affections, Mr. Stablein engaged in a months-long campaign to win her over. Unfortunately, the course that he chose would be understood by anyone, including the defendant, to be one which would cause substantial emotional distress. 4 CP-21-CR-0596, 2003, CP-21-CR-2211-2002 It is clear that, by the same course of conduct, the defendant is also guilty of the summary offense of harassment. Again, his conduct consisted of following Ms. Frey about and in otherwise engaging in a course of conduct which served no legitimate purpose. Mr. Stablein's contention that his relationship with Ms. Frey remained cordial throughout is belied not only by her testimony but by the necessity he felt to wear a wig in the course of tracking her activities. April 7, 2004 Jaime Keating, Esquire Chief Deputy District Attorney Barry Stablein, Pro Se Defendant :rlm Kevin A. Hess, J.