Com. v. Konetsco, M. ( 2017 )

J-S52037-17
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee :
:
v. :
:
MICHAEL ANDREW KONETSCO :
:
Appellant : No. 2068 MDA 2016
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence December 3, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-21-CR-0000046-2014
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., LAZARUS, J., and MUSMANNO, J.
MEMORANDUM BY GANTMAN, P.J.: FILED SEPTEMBER 15, 2017
Appellant, Michael Andrew Konetsco, appeals nunc pro tunc from the
judgment of sentence entered in the Cumberland County Court of Common
Pleas, following his jury trial conviction for one count of possession with the
intent to deliver a controlled substance (“PWID”).1 We affirm.
In its opinion, the trial court accurately set forth the relevant facts and
procedural history of this case. Therefore, we have no reason to restate
them.
Appellant raises one issue for our review:
WHETHER THE EVIDENCE WAS SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT
FOR UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCE WITH INTENT TO DELIVER?
____________________________________________
1
35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(30).
J-S52037-17
(Appellant’s Brief at 3).
After a thorough review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the
applicable law, and the well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable Christylee L.
Peck, we conclude Appellant’s issue merits no relief. The trial court opinion
comprehensively discusses and properly disposes of the question presented.
(See Trial Court Opinion, filed February 16, 2017, at 6-9) (finding: Appellant
accepted delivery of FedEx package from Texas (considered “source state”
for drugs) containing approximately one pound of marijuana; police officer,
who was disguised as FedEx deliveryman, testified that Appellant said he
had been waiting for package to arrive; following his arrest, Appellant
initially told police he expected package to contain guacamole; when police
officer pointed out that guacamole must be refrigerated, Appellant changed
his story and said he expected to receive chocolate and toffee for his
cheesecake business; Commonwealth presented evidence that Appellant had
sent $4,100.00 money order to person in Texas several days earlier, which
is more consistent with price of approximately one pound of marijuana;
Commonwealth’s expert testified amount of marijuana recovered from FedEx
package is uncommon for personal use and is more commonly broken down
for sale and delivery in smaller quantities; upon execution of search warrant,
police seized from Appellant’s home scale and numerous empty pill bottles
missing labels, which are items consistent with sale and drug delivery; text
messages in Appellant’s phone also demonstrated narcotics trafficking;
-2-
J-S52037-17
evidence was sufficient to support Appellant’s PWID conviction).
Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the trial court’s opinion.
Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 9/15/2017
-3-