Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

[U] Commonwealth v. Lee

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

December 4, 2013

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee
v.
HAKEEM LEE, Appellant

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence December 21, 2012, Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County, Criminal Division at No. CP-09-CR-0003028-2011

BEFORE: GANTMAN, DONOHUE and OLSON, JJ.

MEMORANDUM

DONOHUE, J.

Appellant, Hakeem Lee ("Lee") appeals from the trial court's December 21, 2012 judgment of sentence. We affirm.

The trial court recited the pertinent facts in its Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion:

[O]n February 3, 2011, [Lee] was waiting for a bus in the area of a department store in a Warminster shopping mall when he observed the victim. He approached the victim, introduced himself, and asked if he could accompany her back to her parents' apartment. He was informed by the victim that she was fourteen (14) years of age. [Lee] took steps to gain the confidence of the victim during their walk from the department store to the victim's parents' apartment in a nearby complex. As the pair approached the victim's apartment building, [Lee] either persuaded or forced the victim to go into an adjacent building with him, where he forced her into a utility room. That room was the situs of the ensuing sexual offenses. The victim attempted to prevent the sex from occurring, without success.
[Lee] contends that there was no force involved in getting the victim into the utility room, and there was no force involved in the acts leading up to and/or including the consummated sex acts. The victim, after some inquiries by another family member, informed her mother of the incident within a short time after she returned home.

Trial Court Opinion, 2/6/13, at 2-3.

On March 12, 2012, a jury found Lee guilty of aggravated indecent assault, person less than 16 years of age (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3125(a)(8)), and unlawful contact with minors (18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6138(a)(1)). On September 12, 2012, the trial court sentenced Lee to serve two to five years of incarceration for aggravated indecent assault and no further penalty for unlawful contact with minors. The Commonwealth filed a timely petition for reconsideration on September 19, 2012. At a December 21, 2012 hearing on the Commonwealth's petition, the trial court vacated its prior sentence and sentenced Lee to three to six years of incarceration for aggravated indecent assault and a consecutive one to two years for unlawful contact with a minor.

Lee filed a timely notice of appeal on January 17, 2013. He raises two issues for our review:

A. Did the Commonwealth establish by clear and convincing evidence that [Lee] is a sexually violent predator in that the Commonwealth established the following: (1) [Lee] had the requisite mental abnormality; (2) the Commonwealth established the assessment factors under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9795.4(b); and (3) the Commonwealth established that [Lee] was likely to engage in predatory sexual behavior?
B. Did the trial court err in resentencing [Lee] after granting the Commonwealth's motion for reconsideration of sentence when the reasons relied upon by the trial court were outside of and not raised in the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.