Com. v. Lewis, D.
757 EDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 17, 2017Background
- Daniel Lewis was convicted of first-degree murder, carrying a firearm without a license, and possession of an instrument of crime in September 2007 and sentenced to life plus 3½–7 years.
- His direct appeal was denied and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal in 2012.
- Lewis filed a pro se PCRA petition in 2013; counsel was appointed but filed a Turner/Finley “no‑merit” letter and sought to withdraw in 2016.
- The PCRA court issued a Pa.R.Crim.P. 907 notice of intent to dismiss; Lewis mailed responses that were not part of the certified record and filed a late response in December 2016.
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition in January 2017 after independently reviewing the record and agreeing with counsel that the claims were meritless; Lewis appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Lewis) | Defendant's Argument (PCRA court/Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether PCRA counsel’s Turner/Finley letter was legally deficient | Finley letter wrongly concluded petition was frivolous; record contains meritorious claims | Counsel complied with Turner/Finley; court independently reviewed and agreed no merit | Court affirmed: counsel met Turner/Finley requirements and withdrawal proper (no error) |
| 2. Whether trial judge abused discretion by denying recusal for bias | Judge Hughes showed prejudice/appearance of impropriety; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising it | Claim not pleaded in the PCRA petition; waived for failure to plead/seek amendment | Waived: claims not properly presented in PCRA petition, cannot be raised first on appeal |
| 3. Whether judge engaged in judicial misconduct/bad faith denying due process | Judicial misconduct denied fair trial; appellate counsel ineffective for not raising it | Same procedural default: not pled/preserved in PCRA petition | Waived: not raised in petition or properly preserved |
| 4. Whether judge erred by denying disqualification for juror misconduct/ex parte contact | Juror had ex parte contact with Commonwealth witness; prejudice alleged; appellate counsel ineffective | Claim not pleaded in petition; response to Rule 907 was untimely | Waived: merits not reached due to procedural defaults and untimely response |
Key Cases Cited
- Turner v. Commonwealth, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (standards for counsel filing a no‑merit letter in collateral proceedings)
- Finley v. Commonwealth, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (procedures for withdrawal when PCRA claims lack merit)
- Commonwealth v. Rigg, 84 A.3d 1080 (Pa. 2014) (claims not raised in PCRA cannot be asserted first on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Ragan, 923 A.2d 1169 (Pa. 2007) (standard of review for PCRA denials)
- Commonwealth v. Brown, 48 A.3d 1275 (Pa. Super. 2012) (deference to PCRA court findings when record supports them)
- Commonwealth v. Anderson, 995 A.2d 1184 (Pa. Super. 2010) (appellate deference to PCRA findings)
- Commonwealth v. Mason, 130 A.3d 601 (Pa. 2015) (leave to amend PCRA petition requirements)
- Commonwealth v. Henkel, 90 A.3d 16 (Pa. Super. 2014) (raising PCRA counsel ineffectiveness in response to Rule 907)
- Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1 (Pa. Super. 2006) (appellate court limited to certified record)