J-S74014-14

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellee : : v. : : HECTOR AYALA, : : Appellant : No. 3547 EDA 2013

Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered December 3, 2013 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0013066-2008 BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DONOHUE, and STRASSBURGER,* JJ.

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.:FILED JANUARY 20, 2015 The PCRA judge and this Court’s Majority have concluded that the bolstering testimony (I believe M.R. was raped and do not believe her recantation) from the sex crimes police officer, the school counselor, a DHS social worker, and her boyfriend’s mother did not prejudice Appellant. As the Majority points out (Majority Memorandum at 9), an ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails unless a petitioner proves all three requirements: (1) the underlying legal issue has arguable merit, (2) counsel’s actions lacked an objective reasonable basis, and (3) prejudice.

Because the Majority has found the Appellant has failed to prove prejudice, it need not address the other two prongs.

This Concurring Memorandum is written merely to observe that the bolstering here was egregious and should have been objected to.

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.