Com. v. Brown, Y.
798 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jan 31, 2017Background
- Yusef Brown pleaded guilty in 2004 to murder (found guilty of first‑degree murder after a degree of guilt hearing) and related charges for a 2001 killing; he was sentenced to life imprisonment on February 17, 2004.
- Direct appeal affirmed in 2005; no petition for allowance of appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was filed.
- Brown filed a timely first PCRA petition in 2006; it was denied and that denial was affirmed; the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allocatur in 2009.
- Brown filed a second pro se PCRA petition on May 6, 2011 (styled as a habeas petition), later supplemented on August 9, 2012; the PCRA court issued a Rule 907 notice and dismissed the petition as untimely on February 16, 2016.
- Brown appealed pro se, arguing (1) his guilty plea colloquy was defective so the plea was a nullity (attacking timeliness and waiver), and (2) Miller/Montgomery rendered his life sentence unconstitutional and thus fit within the PCRA timing exception for newly recognized, retroactive constitutional rights.
- The Superior Court affirmed, holding Brown’s 2011 petition was untimely and he failed to plead or prove any statutory exception to the PCRA time‑bar.
Issues
| Issue | Brown's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brown's defective plea colloquy makes his PCRA petition timely | Plea was a nullity; therefore timeliness/waiver rules do not apply | Time limits of the PCRA still control; Brown did not invoke statutory exceptions | Court: Rejected — plea deficiency argument does not authorize equitable tolling; Brown failed to plead a statutory exception so petition untimely |
| Whether Miller/Montgomery exception applies to Brown | Miller/Montgomery create a retroactive Eighth Amendment rule that renders his life sentence unconstitutional and fits §9545(b)(1)(iii) | Miller applies only to juveniles; Brown was 20 at the offense and thus not eligible under Miller | Court: Rejected — Brown (age 20 at offense) is outside Miller’s ambit; §9545(b)(1)(iii) does not apply |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. Beck, 139 A.3d 178 (Pa. 2016) (PCRA time limits are jurisdictional; equitable tolling not permitted; petitioner must plead one of §9545 exceptions)
- Jackson v. Commonwealth, 30 A.3d 516 (Pa. Super. 2011) (untimely PCRA petitions must be dismissed if no timeliness exception pled and proved)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (mandatory life without parole for juvenile homicide offenders unconstitutional)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (Miller announced a substantive rule that applies retroactively on collateral review)