Com. v. Ayers, W.
734 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- Appellant William Thomas Ayers was convicted in Luzerne County of corruption of minors, criminal conspiracy, and criminal solicitation and sentenced on February 22, 2006 to an aggregate term of 9 to 36 months plus a fine; the sentence ran concurrently with other county sentences.
- Appellant completed his Luzerne County sentence on February 22, 2009 but remained incarcerated on other county sentences.
- Appellant withdrew his direct appeal on March 28, 2007, making the Luzerne County judgment of sentence final that day.
- Appellant filed a pro se PCRA petition on October 20, 2016; counsel was appointed and limited the requested hearing to the jurisdictional issue.
- The PCRA court held an evidentiary hearing, then denied and dismissed the petition on April 21, 2017, concluding it lacked jurisdiction because Appellant was no longer serving the Luzerne County sentence and the petition was untimely.
- Appellant argued the PCRA court retained jurisdiction because of collateral consequences (termination of parental rights) flowing from the conviction; the court rejected that argument and the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Ayers' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the PCRA court had jurisdiction to hear the October 2016 petition | Ayers: PCRA court has jurisdiction despite elapsed time because collateral consequences (loss of parental rights) persist | Commonwealth: Petition untimely and jurisdictional requirement unmet because judgment became final in 2007 and no exception was pled | Held: No jurisdiction — petition untimely (filed well after one-year limit) and no exception proven |
| Whether a petitioner who has completed his sentence is eligible for PCRA relief | Ayers: Eligible because collateral consequences make relief necessary | Commonwealth: Ineligible once the sentence is complete regardless of collateral consequences | Held: Ineligible — PCRA requires petitioner be currently serving a sentence, so expired sentence bars relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 943 A.2d 264 (Pa. 2008) (one-year filing period for untimely direct appeals begins when time for direct review expires)
- Commonwealth v. Conway, 706 A.2d 1243 (Pa. Super. 1997) (judgment of sentence becomes final when direct appeal is discontinued at appellant's request)
- Commonwealth v. Fisher, 703 A.2d 714 (Pa. Super. 1997) (PCRA precludes relief for petitioners whose sentences have expired despite collateral consequences)
- Commonwealth v. Ahlborn, 699 A.2d 718 (Pa. 1997) (PCRA eligibility requires petitioner to be currently serving a sentence)
- Commonwealth v. Hart, 911 A.2d 939 (Pa. Super. 2006) (confirms ineligibility for PCRA relief after sentence completion despite collateral consequences)