Com. v. Martin, T.
3789 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 27, 2017Background
- Appellant Tracy Martin pled guilty to one count each of insurance fraud and receiving stolen property and accepted a negotiated sentence of 9 to 23 months intermediate punishment.
- Trial court imposed the agreed sentence on September 13, 2016.
- Court-appointed counsel, Patrick J. Connors, filed an Anders/Santiago brief seeking permission to withdraw, and complied with required procedures including notifying Martin of his rights.
- Martin did not file a substantive response to the Anders brief in this appeal but earlier filed a pro se response in a related filing asserting: illegality of sentence and ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC).
- The Superior Court reviewed legality and discretionary-sentencing issues, and considered whether IAC could be addressed on direct appeal or must await collateral review (PCRA).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legality of sentence | Martin contends sentence illegal | Sentence within statutory maximum for insurance fraud; no mandatory minimum imposed | Held: No illegality; sentence lawful |
| Discretionary aspects of sentence | Martin seeks to challenge discretionary sentence | Sentencing negotiated as part of plea; plea precludes discretionary challenge; challenge waived by post-sentence motion language | Held: Waived/frivolous; cannot contest discretionary aspects |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC) on direct appeal | Martin alleges Public Defender rendered ineffective assistance | IAC claims presumptively for collateral review; no express waiver of PCRA right; record does not plainly show meritorious, apparent IAC | Held: IAC claim frivolous on direct appeal; should be raised in collateral review if appropriate |
| Counsel withdrawal under Anders/Santiago | Martin asserts issues but counsel filed Anders brief | Counsel complied with Anders/Santiago and procedural requirements; Martin did not file substantive rebuttal in this appeal | Held: Anders withdrawal permitted; counsel allowed to withdraw; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (requires counsel to identify any nonfrivolous issues and seek permission to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (Pa. Supreme Court’s Anders procedural requirements)
- Commonwealth v. Daniels, 999 A.2d 590 (Pa. Super. 2010) (counsel must notify client and append notification letter when moving to withdraw)
- Commonwealth v. O’Malley, 957 A.2d 1265 (Pa. Super. 2008) (plea agreement precludes challenge to discretionary aspects of sentence)
- Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162 (Pa. Super. 2010) (preservation and waiver principles for post-sentence claims)
- Commonwealth v. Holmes, 79 A.3d 562 (Pa. 2013) (IAC claims are presumptively reserved for collateral review; trial court may hear only when claim is meritorious and apparent on the record)