Com. v. Adorno-Martinez, M.
3467 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 19, 2017Background
- Appellant Mario Adorno-Martinez pleaded guilty in 2006 to rape of a child, corruption of minors, and endangering the welfare of a child; sentenced to 10–25 years and designated a sexually violent predator.
- Direct appeal was unsuccessful; judgment of sentence became final on August 18, 2007 (no allowance of appeal to PA Supreme Court).
- First PCRA petition was filed in 2008, counsel filed a Turner/Finley no‑merit letter, and the petition was dismissed in 2009; that dismissal was later quashed on appeal in 2010.
- Appellant filed a second, pro se PCRA petition on July 29, 2016 asserting Alleyne-based constitutional error rendering his sentence illegal.
- The PCRA court issued Rule 907 notice and dismissed the petition as untimely on October 21, 2016; Appellant appealed.
- The Superior Court affirmed, holding the petition was untimely and that Alleyne does not provide a retroactive basis for relief in collateral review under the PCRA and was not filed within the 60‑day window for invoking a statutory exception.
Issues
| Issue | Appellant's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of PCRA petition | Petition timely or exceptions apply based on Alleyne | Petition untimely; no timely pled statutory exception | Dismissed as untimely; PCRA court lacked jurisdiction |
| Alleyne invalidates sentence | Alleyne requires jury/findings for facts increasing penalty, so sentence illegal | Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review | Alleyne not retroactive under PA law; cannot be used to overcome PCRA time‑bar |
| 60‑day filing requirement for exceptions | Not satisfied but seeks benefit of newly recognized right | 60‑day rule applies; petition long after Alleyne decision | Petition filed well after 60 days from Alleyne; exception not timely invoked |
| Trial court authority to correct illegal sentence absent statutory authorization | Trial court could correct an illegal sentence despite PCRA time limits | No jurisdiction absent a timely PCRA or an applicable statutory exception | Court lacks authority; relief unavailable because of jurisdictional time‑bar |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 139 A.3d 178 (Pa. 2016) (PCRA timeliness is jurisdictional; exceptions required)
- Commonwealth v. Jackson, 30 A.3d 516 (Pa. Super. 2011) (untimely petitions must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (facts increasing mandatory minimum must be found by jury)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne not retroactive on collateral review)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 143 A.3d 418 (Pa. Super. 2016) (standard of review for PCRA denials)
- Commonwealth v. Whitehawk, 146 A.3d 266 (Pa. Super. 2016) (new constitutional rules apply retroactively on collateral review only if the high courts so hold)