Com. v. Dennis, M., 3857 EDA 2016

Background

Michael Dennis was convicted by jury of multiple drug offenses stemming from a 2011 wiretap and surveillance investigation of a large cocaine distribution ring operated from a barbershop; he was deemed a major participant.
On April 1, 2013, Dennis was sentenced to 21–42 years (including mandatory minimums); Superior Court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing because of Alleyne.
On November 20, 2014, Dennis was resentenced to 18–36 years; he did not file a post-sentence motion and his challenge to the discretionary aspects of the sentence was waived on direct appeal.
Dennis filed a pro se PCRA petition (July 2016). Public Defender withdrew; private PCRA counsel (Hylan) was appointed and filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter seeking to withdraw.
The PCRA court issued a Pa.R.Crim.P. 907 notice, Dennis filed a pro se response alleging trial/appellate counsel ineffective for not preserving the discretionary-sentencing claim but did not claim PCRA counsel ineffective.
The PCRA court independently reviewed the record, concluded the PCRA claims lacked merit (including that an undated, unverified letter from Dennis’s brother was not exculpatory or prejudicial), allowed counsel to withdraw, and dismissed the petition; Superior Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether PCRA counsel properly was permitted to withdraw under Turner/Finley	Dennis argued PCRA counsel’s no-merit letter failed to address a key claim (the brother’s affidavit/letter) and misrecited his appellate history, so counsel could not withdraw	PCRA counsel submitted a Turner/Finley no-merit letter addressing the discretionary-sentencing claim and explained why it lacked merit; the court performed independent review	Court held withdrawal proper: counsel’s letter addressed the sentencing claim, court’s independent review agreed the claim lacked merit, so Turner/Finley requirements met
Whether the PCRA court’s independent review was inadequate	Dennis contended the court failed to independently evaluate the unaddressed affidavit/letter and counsel’s deficiencies	Court reviewed record, found the letter unverified, of dubious credibility (author was convicted co-defendant brother), and that overwhelming evidence at trial made it non-prejudicial	Court held independent review adequate and dismissal proper; the undated/unnotarized letter was not exculpatory or outcome-determinative
Whether the undated letter from Anthony Dennis constituted newly-discovered/exculpatory evidence warranting relief	Dennis argued the letter admitting ownership of drugs found near the barbershop could have affected the verdict	Commonwealth and court noted the letter was unverified, author was a guilty co-participant with low credibility, and trial evidence (wiretap/video) was overwhelming	Court held letter was not qualifying exculpatory evidence and would not have changed the outcome; no prejudice shown
Whether the discretionary-sentencing claim had merit if preserved	Dennis argued sentence was excessive and should have been preserved/raised	Court found sentencing court appropriately considered PSI and reasons; even if preserved, challenge lacked merit under abuse-of-discretion standard	Court held the discretionary-sentencing challenge lacked merit and would have failed on appeal

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (procedure for counsel withdrawing from PCRA representation)
Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (no-merit letter framework in PCRA context)
Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (mandatory minimum sentencing error requiring resentencing)
Commonwealth v. Rykard, 55 A.3d 1177 (Pa. Super. 2012) (waiver of PCRA-counsel ineffectiveness claims if not raised in response to Rule 907)
Commonwealth v. Ford, 44 A.3d 1190 (Pa. Super. 2012) (requirement to allege PCRA counsel ineffectiveness in response to court’s intent-to-dismiss notice)
Commonwealth v. Wid, 29 A.3d 816 (Pa. Super. 2011) (Turner/Finley withdrawal criteria)
Commonwealth v. Montalvo, 114 A.3d 401 (Pa. 2015) (standard of review for PCRA denials)