Com. v. Hartless, J.
Com. v. Hartless, J. No. 1578 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | May 22, 2017Background
- On December 2, 2013, Jamey Ray Hartless, while under the influence, crashed his car killing his brother and earlier nearly struck others; he was charged with multiple offenses including homicide by vehicle and third-degree murder.
- Immediately before trial Hartless entered open guilty pleas to all counts except third-degree murder, which the Commonwealth withdrew in exchange for his plea.
- On September 2, 2015, the trial court sentenced Hartless to an aggregate 8½–17 years’ imprisonment (including 5–10 years for DUI-related homicide by vehicle). He did not file post-sentence motions or a direct appeal.
- Hartless filed a pro se PCRA petition on April 13, 2016; counsel Christopher Moore was appointed but filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter and petition to withdraw rather than an amended PCRA petition.
- At the PCRA hearing Hartless testified his guilty plea was involuntary because he was not mentally present and had parroted plea counsel’s answers; plea counsel testified Hartless understood and answered the plea colloquy. The PCRA court found Hartless not credible and denied relief.
- The Superior Court conducted an independent Turner/Finley review, concluded counsel complied with withdrawal requirements, found Hartless’s involuntariness claim meritless, affirmed the PCRA denial, and granted counsel’s withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Hartless’s Argument | Commonwealth/Trial Counsel’s Position | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hartless’s guilty plea was involuntary because he "parroted" counsel and was not in his right mind during the colloquy | Hartless: plea involuntary; counsel told him how to answer and he was not mentally present | Counsel: Hartless understood, reviewed plea form question-by-question, answered voluntarily; counsel did not substitute answers | Court: Credibility favored counsel; plea was voluntary; PCRA claim denied |
| Whether PCRA counsel complied with Turner/Finley withdrawal requirements | Hartless: challenged merits despite counsel’s no-merit letter | PCRA counsel: issued no-merit letter, listed issues, explained why meritless, served Hartless and filed petition to withdraw | Court: Moore satisfied Turner/Finley technical requirements (with minor advisory about wording); withdrawal allowed |
| Whether the record contained any other meritorious PCRA claims | Hartless: asserted only the plea-voluntariness claim in response | Commonwealth: no other meritorious claims identified | Court: Independent review found no other meritorious issues; affirmed denial |
| Whether the PCRA court properly resolved credibility at the hearing | Hartless: contested PCRA court credibility finding | Commonwealth: PCRA court’s credibility determination supported by record and testimony | Court: Affirmed PCRA court’s credibility ruling and rejection of Hartless’s testimony |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (establishes PCRA counsel’s obligation to conduct independent review before withdrawing on collateral appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988) (en banc) (paired with Turner for no‑merit withdrawal procedure)
- Commonwealth v. Pitts, 981 A.2d 875 (Pa. 2009) (clarifies technical requirements for Turner/Finley no‑merit letters)
- Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2007) (requires counsel to serve petitioner with no‑merit letter, withdrawal petition, and advise right to proceed pro se or with new counsel)