Com. v. Abrams, J.
Com. v. Abrams, J. No. 262 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 16, 2017Background
- Jermaine Abrams was convicted of first-degree murder for an offense committed at age 17 and sentenced in 2004 to life without parole.
- Abrams filed a PCRA petition beginning in 2010 (initially premised on Graham) and amended it multiple times; the petition remained pending when Miller issued in 2012.
- The PCRA court denied relief in 2015, concluding Miller did not apply retroactively based on Pennsylvania Supreme Court precedent (Commonwealth v. Cunningham).
- While this appeal was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Montgomery, holding Miller announced a substantive rule that applies retroactively.
- This Court applied Montgomery (and Commonwealth v. Secreti) to find Abrams’s petition timely under the PCRA timeliness exception, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing with appointed counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Abrams) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness / PCRA one-year rule | Miller-based claim is timely under §9545(b)(1)(iii) because Miller is a new constitutional rule made retroactive | Miller does not retroactively apply; Cunningham controls | Montgomery/Secreti make Miller retroactive; Abrams’s petition meets the §9545(b)(1)(iii) exception |
| Entitlement to relief under Miller | Mandatory LWOP for juvenile homicide offenders unconstitutional; requires individualized resentencing considering youth factors | Sentence should stand absent retroactivity | Under Miller/Montgomery and Secreti, Abrams is entitled to resentencing with juvenile-age considerations (per Batts/Knox factors) |
| Right to counsel at resentencing | Entitled to counsel for critical stage of resentencing | Not contested | Court ordered appointment of counsel for resentencing (sentencing is a critical stage) |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012) (mandatory juvenile LWOP unconstitutional)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (Miller announced substantive rule that is retroactive)
- Commonwealth v. Secreti, 134 A.3d 77 (Pa. Super. 2016) (applies Montgomery retroactivity to effect of Miller as of Miller’s date)
- Commonwealth v. Batts, 66 A.3d 286 (Pa. 2013) (juvenile sentencing requires consideration of age-related factors)
- Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 81 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2013) (held Miller non-retroactive prior to Montgomery)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (prohibited LWOP for non-homicide juvenile offenders)
- Com. ex rel. Wright v. Cavell, 220 A.2d 611 (Pa. 1966) (sentencing is a critical stage entitling defendant to counsel)