Altoona man’s attempted murder charge upheld

Riddle-Hatcher convicted of firing gun at girlfriend as she fled in car

A charge of attempted murder against an Altoona man who six years ago allegedly fired a shotgun at his girlfriend following a domestic argument will stand, even though the girlfriend in a post-trial hearing contended she, not he, fired the weapon.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court in an opinion issued Thursday concluded the testimony at trial provided "overwhelming evidence" that it was Christopher David Riddle-Hatcher, 40, who on Sept. 20, 2020, fired a shotgun at his paramour as she was driving away from their home on the 1500 block of Third Avenue.

Riddle-Hatcher was convicted of attempted murder, aggravated assault, possession of an instrument of crime and recklessly endangering another person during a four-day trial in 2022.

Blair County Senior Judge Timothy M. Sullivan sentenced him to a prison term of 10 to 20 years.

He is presently incarcerated in the State Correctional Institution Albion in Erie County.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court in its opinion described the incident between Riddle-Hatcher and his girlfriend "as a violent domestic quarrel."

Riddle-Hatcher "tore up several pieces of furniture and sustained cuts that caused him to bleed," the opinion continued.

The paramour had a necklace ripped off and police found a clump of her hair in the residence.

As police pieced the story together, it was concluded that the girl fled the home in her bare feet, got into a car and drove away, at which point Riddle-Hatcher fired a shotgun at the fleeing vehicle.

The blast hit the driver's side door.

The victim did not testify during the trial.

But, between the end of the trial and sentencing, the defense sought a new trial due to an email from the victim "that exonerated (Riddle-Hatcher) of all charges"

A hearing was held in which the victim testified that she was the person who fired the shotgun.

The judge denied the motion for a new trial.

Riddle-Hatcher's initial appeal was dismissed, but in 2025, the judge reinstated the defendant's appeal rights.

It was at this point that the defense, led by attorney Stacy R. Parks of State College, raised six questions on appeal before the Superior Court.

On Thursday, a Superior Court panel that included judges Victor P. Stabile, Timika Lane and John T. Bender upheld Riddle-Hatcher's sentence.

The Superior Court decision reviewed the case, noting that multiple neighbors heard the shotgun blast that brought police to the area.

When APD officer Tim Campolong arrived, he found Riddle-Hatcher holding a shotgun. Police in their investigation found shotgun residue on the suspect's hands.

Police found the victim's necklace and clump of her hair inside the home.

They found four live rounds in the weapon and a shell on the ground outside the home.

Also, officers eventually located the victim in the car she drove from the home.

"Two police witnesses testified she was distraught, and one noticed she was not wearing shoes during the interview at the police station, a sign that she had fled the premises in a rush," according to the Superior Court summary of the case.

Riddle-Hatcher admitted the firearm was in his hands when the weapon was discharged, and his, not the victim's, DNA was found on the shotgun.

The victim in her story stated she was the one who picked up the gun outside the residence as Riddle-Hatcher put it down to light a cigarette, and she was running with the gun when it discharged. The car was sitting near the home with the engine running so she got in and fled. In her statement, she also admitted to being high on methamphetamine that night -- a fact she did not initially reveal to police.

The Superior Court panel stated the story told by the victim "lacked credibility."

It concluded the trial court "had ample reason" to deny Riddle-Hatcher's request for a new trial.

According to testimony during the trial, the domestic incident occurred as the couple argued over an ex-boyfriend of the victim.

The defense challenged the introduction of telephone conversations between the couple, recorded by prison authorities, that indicated the two still had affection for each other.

The panel stated the recordings were "not of such a nature and character that a different outcome (of the trial) is likely."