from the Judgment of Sentence July 22, 2016 In the Court of
Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at
BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., NICHOLS, J., and STEVENS, [*] P.J.E.
Yaasmeer Enix, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered
following his conviction of aggravated assault. We vacate the
judgment of sentence and remand for a new trial.
trial court summarized the procedural history of this case as
On October 22, 2009, [Appellant] was arrested and charged
with inter-alia: 1) Attempted Murder1; 2)
Aggravated Assault2; 3) Firearms not to be Carried
Without a License3, 4) Carrying Firearms on Public
Streets or Public Property in Philadelphia4; and
5) Possession of an Instrument of a Crime With
Intent.5 March 26, 2016, [Appellant's] first
trial, the jury was unable to reach a verdict, which ended in
a mistrial .... On May 2, 2016, [Appellant], at the
conclusion of his second jury trial, was convicted only on
the charge of Aggravated Assault.
1 18 Pa.C.S.A. 901(a)
2 18 Pa.C.S.A. §2702(a)
3 18 Pa.C.S.A. §6106
4 18 Pa.C.S.A. §6108
5 18 Pa.C.S.A. 907(a)
On July 14, 2016, [Appellant] filed a motion for
extraordinary relief, which the [trial c]ourt denied, after a
hearing on July 22, 2016[.] On July 22, 2016, [Appellant] was
sentenced to a period of confinement in a state correctional
facility of ten to twenty years on the charge of Aggravated
Assault. On August 1, 2016, [Appellant] timely filed a motion
seeking reconsideration of his sentence, which the [trial
c]ourt subsequently denied on October 4, 2016.
On August 15, 2016, [Appellant] timely filed the instant
appeal to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania[.]6
On August 16, 2016, this [c]ourt filed and served on
[Appellant] an Order pursuant to Rule 1925(b) of the
Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, directing
[Appellant] to file and serve a Statement of Errors
Complained of on Appeal within twenty-one days of the
[c]ourt's Order. On September 6, 2016, [Appellant] timely
filed a rambling "Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate
Procedure 1925(b) Statement," improperly setting forth
extensive factual and legal argument.
6September 30, 2016, the Superior Court issued,
sua sponte, a rule to show cause why [Appellant's] notice
of appeal should not be quashed as interlocutory[.] By order
dated November 8, 2016, the Superior Court referred decision
on its rule to the panel assigned to rule on the merits of
Trial Court Opinion, 8/16/17, at 1-2.
presents the following issues for our review:
I. Did the trial judge, after closing arguments, abuse his
discretion and interject his own biased opinion to the jury
against Appellant's case, in the closing charges, and, in
doing so, violate Appellant's right to due process and a
II. Was the evidence insufficient for a finding of guilt on
the single charge of aggravated assault?
III. Was the jury verdict on the single charge of Aggravated
Assault against the ...