HomeMy WebLinkAbout98-2111 criminal appeal].S06017/06
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, :
Appellee .'
:
V.
:
THERESA L. FERNBAUGH, :
Appellant :
BEFORE'
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PEN NSYLVANIA
No. 1149 MDA 1999
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 22, 1999
In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County
Criminal, No. 98-2111
CAVANAUGH, ORIE MELVIN and BROSKY, J].
MEMORANDUM' I= I I. ~ I:) FEB ! I 21:1~
Theresa L. Fernbaugh appeals directly from a sentence of probation
which followed her conviction by a jury of arson endangering property and
arson endangering personsi On appeal, the sole challenge is that the
evidence was insufficient to prove that appellant intentionally set fire to her
house which was owned jointly with her husband.
Accordingly, our task is to examine the evidence in order to see if the
facts in evidence and the inferences reasonably deducible therefrom support
the guilty verdicts. Commonwealth v. Burgo$, 530 Pa. 473, 610 A.2d 11
(1992).
Important to our review is the principle that the evidence must be
viewed in a light favorable to the verdict winning Commonwealth. Zd.
So considered, we find that on August 28, 1998, Fernbaugh went to
'the residence of her mother-in-law to see or pick up her two children who
were in the care of the mother-in-law. Apparently, rebuffed in her efforts,
~.S06017/00
appellant persisted by continuing to press the bell of the residence. Officer
Pellman of the Mechanicsburg Police Department came upon the scene and
caused her to desist after her husband arrived. Husband was not supportive
of Ms. Fernbaugh's goals and she left the scene to go to the Fernbaugh's
jointly owned residence. After a time, there was a fire at the Fernbaugh's
and appellant was encountered outside of the house clad in a nightgown by
the same Officer Pellman who was now responding to the second incident.
The Commonwealth presented evidence of admissions by Ms. Fernbaugh to
the several individuals who had contact with her on the street outside the
burning residence,z She told Donna Pablo, a passing motorist who offered
assistance, "I just set my house on fire" and added "I want to kill myself."
Appellant stated to Amy O'Donnell, a neighbor who called 911 when she saw
flames and encountered Fernbaugh in the street, "look what ! did, isn't it
pretty" which she repeated "over and over." At the time of her reencounter
with Officer Pellman, she said, "! set my house on fire" and when' asked why,
replied, "because I want to kill myself."
While all of these admissions are arguably as consistent with the
statements of a distraught actor whose negligence may have caused a fire,
as they are with the admission of intentionally setting a fire of incendiary
origin, the Commonwealth presented other evidence. Larry Seagrist,
The fire, which was mostly confined to one room, was quickly extinguished by responding
firefighters.
2
].S06017/00
Borough Fire Chief of Mechanicsburg, testified as to the condition of the
living room, the site of the fire when he inspected it after it was safe to
enter. He found evidence of the burning in the living room including a two-
seat love seat where the cushions on the back and on the seat were
completely burned away. Also testifYing was Nolan Brewbaker, Deputy Fire
Marshal for Cumberland County, who appeared as an expert witness. He
investigated the scene on August 28, 1998. He eliminated heating sources
and electrical sources as the origin of ignition. His opinion was that the love
seat was the origin of the fire. There was no evidence of an accelerant. ]:n
anticipation of appellant's defense, the witness stated that he found no
evidence of a spent candle at the site of the origin but, did find evidence of
candles elsewhere in the room. Evidence of burned cloth material was found
on the floor near the love seat. The witness further opined as to the
relative unlikelihood of a falling candle acting to ignite a pillow, stating, inter
alia, that material must first be heated to an ignition temperature before
burning takes place.
Accordingly, the sum of the Commonwealth's evidence was that
appellant had experienced an upsetting confrontation concerning her
inability to see her children and had gone to her residence where she was
alone. The fire started in her house and she admitted to three witnesses
that she was the cause of the fire. Finally, expert testimony pointed to
someone having intentionally ignited the fire. Viewing this evidence and the
3
J.S06017/00
reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, we easily conclude that the
evidence is sufficient to support a verdict that appellant had the necessary
intention to, and did, commit an arson endangering persons or property. 18
Pa.C.S.A. §§3301(a)(1) and 3301(c)(2).2
The fact that appellant testified at trial and presented expert testimony
does not alter our conclusion. Fernbaugh first gave her version of the
events surrounding her attempt to see her children. She stated that she
then returned to her home and, after taking very heaVy dosages of her
medication3, she prepared to watch a movie on her video and set the scene
by placing pillows on the floor, and two lit two candles in holders; one on a
table, and one on a picnic basket. Later, feeling drowsy, she sought to
move the candle on the picnic basket and, as she became distracted the
candle fell onto the pillows. Smoke and flames followed and she soon fled
the premises.
Appellant also presented a fire expert who investigated the fire on
· behalf of the fire insurance company. He offered his opinion that the fire
was accidental and, therefore, not incendiary.
While the Jury might have credited appellant's testimony and the
opinion of her expert, the plain fact is that they chose, not to and, instead,
accepted the Commonwealth's evidence and its inferences as credible.
2 NO other elements of these offenses are at issue on this appeal.
3 An unstated quantity of Paxil and 8 Trazadones.
4
].S06017/0b
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient to support a verdict of conviction in an
arson case. Commonwealth v. Trafford, 459 A.2d 373 (Pa. Super. 1983);
Commonwealth v. Ford, 607 A.2d 764 (Pa. Super. 1992).
We affirm the judgment of sentence.
Judgment affirmed.
~r~ ~onotary'
- B1
Date:
5