Com. v. Cox, D., 964 WDA 2016

Daron Albert Cox was convicted by a jury on July 24, 1997 of first‑degree murder and related charges for a December 7, 1996 shooting; he was 18 at the time.
Sentenced on September 23, 1997 to mandatory life without parole (LWOP) plus a concurrent 3½–7 year term.
Direct appeal and state postconviction efforts were unsuccessful; prior PCRA petitions were filed and denied (first petition filed 2000; second in 2006).
On February 16, 2016 Cox filed a third, pro se PCRA petition asserting Miller/Montgomery relief based on the unconstitutionality and retroactivity of mandatory juvenile LWOP sentences.
The PCRA court issued Rule 907 notice, denied the petition on June 1, 2016, and Cox appealed pro se to the Superior Court.
The Superior Court considered timeliness and substantive applicability of Miller/Montgomery given Cox’s age at the offense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Cox’s PCRA petition is timely under the Montgomery/Miller exception	Cox argued Montgomery (retroactivity of Miller) created a new constitutional rule and he filed within 60 days of Montgomery	Commonwealth asserted exceptions apply only for juvenile offenders and timeliness is jurisdictional	Denied — Montgomery/Miller relief applies only to juvenile offenders; Cox was 18 at offense so not entitled to the exception or relief
Whether Miller invalidates Cox’s mandatory LWOP sentence	Cox contended Miller renders mandatory LWOP unconstitutional and requires relief	Commonwealth argued Miller does not apply to adult offenders	Denied — Miller applies to juveniles; Cox was not a juvenile at offense; no substantive relief available
Whether Montgomery’s retroactivity date supports Cox’s 60‑day filing	Cox filed within 60 days of Montgomery and relied on Secreti precedent applying that date	Commonwealth argued even if timely, the rule doesn’t apply to him because of age	Court accepted timing rule but found substantive inapplicability due to age; petition fails
Whether the PCRA court retained jurisdiction to hear the late petition	Cox relied on statutory 60‑day window after new right is recognized	Commonwealth maintained state timeliness and jurisdictional rules bar relief for non‑juveniles	Court held PCRA jurisdiction exists for timely filings under Montgomery but substantive relief limited to juveniles; Cox’s claim fails

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles unconstitutional)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016) (Miller held retroactively applicable on collateral review)
Commonwealth v. Chambers, 35 A.3d 34 (Pa. Super. 2011) (requirements for invoking new‑constitutional‑right PCRA exception)
Commonwealth v. Batts, 66 A.3d 286 (Pa. 2013) (procedural guidance for resentencing where Miller applies)
Commonwealth v. Turner, 73 A.3d 1283 (Pa. Super. 2013) (timeliness is jurisdictional on PCRA petitions)