Com. v. Jones, M.
3585 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 28, 2016Background
- Marvin Jones was convicted in a non-jury trial (April 2008) of possession with intent to deliver, possession, and possession of paraphernalia; sentenced to 7–14 years plus probation.
- Direct appeal affirmed by the Superior Court (Dec. 2009); Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance (June 2010); judgment became final Sept. 22, 2010 (no certiorari).
- Jones filed a first PCRA petition in 2014 which the trial court dismissed as untimely; Superior Court affirmed, noting Alleyne would not apply retroactively.
- In Aug. 2015 Jones (through privately retained counsel) filed a second PCRA petition asserting his mandatory-minimum sentence was unconstitutional under Alleyne and Commonwealth v. Hopkins.
- The PCRA court issued a notice to dismiss and dismissed the second petition as untimely (Nov. 2, 2015); Jones appealed and the Superior Court affirmed (Oct. 28, 2016).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of second PCRA petition | Jones: petition invokes Alleyne/Hopkins new-right exception, so it is timely under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(b)(1)(iii) and filed within 60 days of Hopkins. | Commonwealth: judgment was final in 2010; petition filed in 2015 is untimely and no time‑bar exception applies. | Court: Petition untimely; no jurisdiction because §9545(b) one‑year rule and exceptions not met. |
| Retroactivity of Alleyne/Hopkins | Jones: Hopkins (interpreting Alleyne) announces a new constitutional rule that should apply retroactively on collateral review. | Commonwealth: Alleyne and Hopkins do not apply retroactively to cases final before those decisions; only retroactivity declared by PA or US Supreme Court applies. | Court: Alleyne/Hopkins do not apply retroactively to collateral review here; §9545(b)(1)(iii) exception not satisfied. |
| Court’s inherent jurisdiction to vacate illegal sentence | Jones: trial court should vacate an illegal/void sentence regardless of PCRA time limits. | Commonwealth: even legality claims must meet PCRA timeliness or an exception; untimely petition deprives court of jurisdiction. | Court: Lack of jurisdiction to reach merits; legality claim cannot bypass PCRA time requirements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (established rule that facts increasing maximum sentence must be found by jury beyond reasonable doubt)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (held facts that raise mandatory minimums must be found beyond reasonable doubt)
- Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 117 A.3d 247 (Pa. 2015) (Pennsylvania decision applying Alleyne to §6317 mandatory minimum statute)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 102 A.3d 988 (Pa. Super. 2014) (Alleyne does not satisfy PCRA new‑right exception absent Supreme Court holding of retroactivity)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (declared Alleyne not retroactive to cases on collateral review)
- Commonwealth v. Bennett, 930 A.2d 1264 (Pa. 2007) (timeliness is jurisdictional for PCRA)
- Commonwealth v. Fairiror, 809 A.2d 396 (Pa. Super. 2002) (PCRA court lacks jurisdiction to hear untimely petition)
- Commonwealth v. Riggle, 119 A.3d 1058 (Pa. Super. 2015) (Alleyne applies to cases on direct appeal when issued)