The lower court convicted the defendant of charges related to the sexual assault of a four-year-old. He raised numerous issues on appeal with the Pennsylvania Superior Court, which denied each argument. First, the Court held that the defendant was not entitled to relief on a claim that the lower court violated the coordinate jurisdiction rule because the defendant raised the claim for the first time in post-sentence motions and the issue regarded a pre-trial motion in limine. Second, the Court held that the trial court did not err in denying a defense motion for a continuance prior to trial. Third, the Court ruled that the lower court did not abuse is discretion in finding the minor victim competent to testify. In his fourth issue, he raised various claims about evidentiary rulings, but the Superior Court held that he failed to develop those claims with an adequate argument and they were thus waived. Lastly, the Court held that the lower court did not abuse its discretion in not giving a missing evidence and/or missing witness jury instruction.