219 A.3d 689
Pa. Super. Ct.2019Background
- Donald Knecht pleaded guilty (Feb. 2012) to multiple sexual offenses, including involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child, indecent assault of a child under 13, and 50 counts of possession of child pornography.
- Sentenced to an aggregate 12½–25 years imprisonment and five years probation; adjudicated a sexually violent predator.
- Five years after sentencing Knecht filed a pro se PCRA petition; counsel was appointed and filed an amended petition.
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition as untimely under the PCRA; Knecht appealed.
- Appellate counsel filed a Turner/Finley brief and sought withdrawal, advancing the issue whether Commonwealth v. Muniz creates a retroactive constitutional right sufficient to invoke the PCRA timeliness exception.
- The Superior Court independently reviewed the issue, concluded Muniz is not shown to apply retroactively, affirmed the dismissal, and granted counsel’s withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Muniz announces a constitutional right that applies retroactively so as to satisfy the PCRA timeliness exception (§ 9545(b)(1)(iii)) and vest the court with jurisdiction to hear an otherwise untimely petition | Commonwealth: Muniz has not been held retroactive by the U.S. Supreme Court or Pennsylvania Supreme Court; therefore the § 9545(b)(1)(iii) exception is unavailable | Knecht: Muniz announced a new constitutional rule (invalidating SORNA) that should be applied retroactively, allowing his otherwise untimely PCRA petition to proceed | The court held Muniz has not been held retroactive by either the U.S. Supreme Court or Pennsylvania Supreme Court; Rivera‑Figueroa did not decide retroactivity; the timeliness exception is unmet; PCRA dismissal affirmed and counsel’s withdrawal granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Muniz, 164 A.3d 1189 (Pa. 2017) (held aspects of SORNA unconstitutional under ex post facto principles)
- Commonwealth v. Rivera‑Figueroa, 174 A.3d 674 (Pa. Super. 2017) (addressed access to Muniz on timely PCRA petitions; did not rule Muniz retroactive)
- Commonwealth v. Abdul‑Salaam, 812 A.2d 497 (Pa. 2002) (timeliness exception requires a retroactive right recognized by PA or US Supreme Court)
- Commonwealth v. Murphy, 180 A.3d 402 (Pa. Super. 2018) (held Muniz not retroactive for PCRA timeliness purposes)
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (standards for counsel withdrawal)
- Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (counsel withdrawal and brief requirements)