Com. v. Davis, V.
Com. v. Davis v. No. 1814 EDA 2016
Pa. Super. Ct.Jul 13, 2017Background
- Vincent Davis (aka Terrell Strong) was convicted in 1991 of first‑degree murder and PIC; sentenced in 1993 to life + concurrent 2½–5 years.
- Direct appeals concluded in 1994; judgment of sentence became final on November 14, 1994 (expiration of time to seek certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court).
- Davis filed a timely first PCRA petition in 1995; counsel was appointed, amended petitions were litigated, and the PCRA was denied in 1996; this denial was affirmed on appeal in 1997.
- In 2013 Davis filed a pro se petition styled as a writ of habeas corpus alleging a charging defect: that he could not be convicted under an accomplice‑liability theory absent an accomplice charge and despite acquittal of conspiracy. The court treated the filing as a PCRA petition.
- The trial court issued Pa.R.Crim.P. 907 notice and denied relief in May 2016 as untimely and previously litigated; this Superior Court appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of PCRA petition | Davis: his petition raises jurisdictional/charging defects so relief is proper despite delay | Commonwealth: petition filed in 2013, long after the one‑year PCRA deadline; no time‑bar exception invoked | Court: Petition is untimely (final judgment 1994; petition filed 2013) and jurisdictionally barred |
| Availability of habeas vs PCRA | Davis: styled his filing as habeas corpus challenging charging/subject‑matter defects | Commonwealth: claims cognizable only under PCRA; caption does not avoid PCRA requirements | Court: Correctly treated the filing as a PCRA petition under Peterkin and PCRA statute |
| Application of PCRA exceptions | Davis: did not invoke or plead a statutory exception within 60 days | Commonwealth: no exceptions pled or proven | Court: No exception shown; time‑bar not excused |
| Previously litigated claims (res judicata) | Davis: challenges to accomplice liability and charging defect | Commonwealth: same claims raised and litigated in prior PCRA; barred by 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(a)(3) | Court: Claims previously litigated; petitioner ineligible for relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Peterkin, 722 A.2d 638 (Pa. 1998) (a petition raising claims cognizable under the PCRA is subject to the PCRA even if captioned otherwise)
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 73 A.3d 1283 (Pa. Super. 2013) (timeliness is a jurisdictional prerequisite for PCRA relief)
- Commonwealth v. Hackett, 956 A.2d 978 (Pa. 2008) (collateral attack on an underlying conviction falls within the ambit of the PCRA)
- Commonwealth v. Davis, 644 A.2d 804 (Pa. Super. 1994) (direct appeal decision in Davis’s case)
- Commonwealth v. Davis, 700 A.2d 1023 (Pa. Super. 1997) (affirming denial of Davis’s earlier PCRA petition)