Com. v. Jones, Q., Com. v. Jones, Q. No. 1011 EDA 2016

In 2003, Quincy Jones (Appellant) stabbed fellow inmate Andre Council in the eye with a pen while both were detained at the Philadelphia Industrial Correctional Center; Council lost vision in his left eye.
A bench trial convicted Jones of aggravated assault (second-degree felony), among other counts; in 2005 he was sentenced to 7½–15 years' imprisonment.
Jones filed a pro se PCRA petition in 2006 claiming trial counsel failed to file a requested direct appeal; after reassignment and review, the court reinstated appellate rights nunc pro tunc in 2013.
This Court vacated the original sentence in 2014 because 7½–15 years exceeded the statutory maximum for a second‑degree felony and remanded for resentencing.
At resentencing in November 2015, Judge Cohen imposed 5–10 years; Jones filed post‑sentence and resentencing motions arguing the court failed to consider his harsh background and that teleconference appearance prevented full allocution; motions were denied by operation of law.
Appointed appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and petition to withdraw; the Superior Court conducted independent review, found Jones’s claims frivolous, affirmed the judgment, and granted counsel’s withdrawal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the resentencing court abused its discretion by not adequately considering Jones’s harsh background when imposing sentence	Jones: court failed to consider mitigating evidence of sexual abuse, addiction, and rehabilitation; sentence excessive	Commonwealth: court reviewed PSI, considered mitigating factors, sentence within statutory limits	Held: No substantial question; claim does not merit discretionary review and is frivolous
Whether the court erred in denying Jones’s Motion for Resentencing to allow oral presentation of additional mitigating evidence after he appeared by teleconference	Jones: teleconference inhibited consultation with counsel and full allocution about background and rehab	Commonwealth: Jones had submitted written information and already addressed rehabilitation; court appropriately relied on the record and PSI	Held: No abuse of discretion; resentencing court was not required to hold another hearing for evidence already in record

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requires procedures when counsel seeks to withdraw on grounds of frivolous appeal)
Commonwealth v. Flowers, 113 A.3d 1246 (Pa. Super. 2015) (appellate court must conduct independent review when counsel files an Anders brief)
Commonwealth v. Evans, 901 A.2d 528 (Pa. Super. 2006) (four-part test for discretionary sentencing review)
Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162 (Pa. Super. 2010) (what constitutes a substantial question for sentencing review)
Commonwealth v. Hanson, 856 A.2d 1254 (Pa. Super. 2004) (allegation that court failed to consider mitigating factors does not ordinarily present substantial question)
Commonwealth v. Trippett, 932 A.2d 188 (Pa. Super. 2007) (bald assertions of excessiveness insufficient for review)
Commonwealth v. Burtner, 453 A.2d 10 (Pa. Super. 1982) (trial court not required to hold a modification hearing if petition does not allege errors in sentencing procedure)