Com. v. Boyd, F.
2100 EDA 2024
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Apr 14, 2025Background
- Francis J. Boyd was convicted in 1976 of second-degree murder related to a bar robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment.
- The direct appeal was initially filed with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court but transferred to the Superior Court due to a change in law; the judgment was affirmed in 1979.
- Boyd did not seek further review and subsequently filed eight unsuccessful PCRA petitions before this case.
- His ninth pro se PCRA petition, filed in 2022, raised claims regarding newly discovered facts, governmental interference, and new constitutional rights, supplementing and amending the petition over two years.
- The PCRA court issued notice of intent to dismiss as untimely, ultimately dismissing the petition because it did not meet any statutory exceptions to the PCRA's time-bar.
Issues
| Issue | Boyd's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness – New Fact Exception | Newly discovered facts justify timeliness exception | Facts not new and could have been discovered | Exception not met; claim previously raised |
| Timeliness – Government Interference Exception | Counsel's failure to appeal due to government-issued jurisdiction change | Counsel not a government official; no government duty to notify | No government interference under the statute |
| Timeliness – New Constitutional Right Exception (Bradley, Tarselli) | PA Supreme Court created new right to raise ineffective assistance claim | Bradley does not create new constitutional right | Bradley does not apply; Tarselli non-precedential |
| Sentencing Unconstitutional (Tarselli) | Sentence unconstitutional under Tarselli/Miller/Montgomery | No explicit pleading of timeliness exception | Not within jurisdiction due to untimely petition |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Fears, 86 A.3d 795 (Pa. 2014) (sets standard for PCRA review, deference to factual findings)
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 837 A.2d 1157 (Pa. 2003) (reinforces jurisdictional nature of PCRA time-bar)
- Commonwealth v. Bennett, 930 A.2d 1264 (Pa. 2007) (sets out standard for newly discovered fact exception)
- Commonwealth v. Pursell, 749 A.2d 911 (Pa. 2000) (counsel is not a government official under the PCRA government interference exception)
- Commonwealth v. Marshall, 947 A.2d 714 (Pa. 2008) (newly discovered fact exception focuses on new facts, not new sources)