Com. v. Magondu, F.
729 EDA 2017
Pa. Super. Ct.Sep 19, 2017Background
- Fred Magondu pled guilty (Jan 6, 2009) to multiple sexual offenses including rape of a mentally disabled person and corruption of minors; sentenced April 8, 2009 to 10–20 years (rape) plus consecutive 2½–5 years (corruption of minors).
- Magondu filed a post‑sentence motion (denied) but did not file a direct appeal; his judgment became final May 8, 2009.
- He filed a pro se PCRA petition on February 27, 2015; counsel was appointed, a hearing was held, and counsel later filed a Turner/Finley no‑merit letter and petition to withdraw.
- Magondu’s PCRA raised three claims: trial court erred by imposing consecutive (not concurrent) sentences; his mandatory minimum sentence was illegal under Alleyne/Wolfe; and plea counsel was ineffective for not challenging the sentence.
- The PCRA court issued Rule 907 notice, dismissed the petition as untimely (no applicable timeliness exception), and this appeal followed. PCRA counsel’s withdrawal under Turner/Finley was approved.
Issues
| Issue | Magondu’s Argument | Commonwealth’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of PCRA petition | Petition timely under Alleyne/Wolfe exception | Petition is facially untimely and no exception applies | Petition untimely; dismissal affirmed |
| Alleyne/Wolfe retroactivity | Section 9718 mandatory minimums unconstitutional under Alleyne; Wolfe supports relief | Alleyne and Wolfe do not apply retroactively on collateral review | Alleyne/Wolfe do not provide a retroactive basis; time‑bar exception not met |
| Ineffective assistance of plea counsel | Counsel ineffective for not challenging illegal mandatory minimum | Claim is governed by PCRA timeliness and lacks jurisdiction if untimely | Ineffectiveness claim denied as untimely and meritless on collateral review |
| Counsel withdrawal procedure (Turner/Finley) | N/A (challenged by Magondu later) | PCRA counsel complied with Turner/Finley requirements | Court found counsel complied and granted withdrawal |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wolfe, 140 A.3d 651 (Pa. 2016) (addressed Section 9718 and Alleyne‑based challenge)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (holding facts increasing mandatory minimum must be found by jury)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review)
- Commonwealth v. Watts, 23 A.3d 980 (Pa. 2011) (subsequent decisional law is not a new "fact" for PCRA timeliness)
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (procedural standards for counsel seeking to withdraw in PCRA matters)
- Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (companion to Turner on no‑merit withdrawal procedure)