Com. v. Mickens, R.
Com. v. Mickens, R. No. 1662 WDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jun 23, 2017Background
- Robert Mickens was convicted of first-degree murder in 1995 and sentenced to life imprisonment; judgment became final in 1998.
- Mickens filed multiple PCRA petitions; his first two were dismissed and appeals denied; this appeal concerns his third PCRA petition filed March 29, 2016.
- PCRA counsel was appointed then permitted to withdraw under Turner/Finley procedures; the PCRA court gave Rule 907 notice and dismissed the petition on September 22, 2016.
- Mickens argued his petition fit the PCRA timeliness exception for new constitutional rules, citing Miller v. Alabama, Montgomery v. Louisiana, and People v. House.
- The Commonwealth and the court treated the petition as facially untimely because the one-year PCRA filing period had long expired and Mickens did not plead a valid exception.
- The PCRA court dismissed without a hearing; the Superior Court affirmed for lack of a timeliness exception applicable to Mickens’ facts.
Issues
| Issue | Mickens' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the third PCRA petition is timely or meets a statutory timeliness exception | Petition invokes §9545(b)(1)(iii): a new constitutional right (relying on Miller/Montgomery/House) to overcome the one-year time bar | Petition is facially untimely; Mickens did not plead facts showing a recognized, retroactive constitutional right applicable to him | Petition untimely; no timeliness exception shown; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether Miller/Montgomery/House provide a retroactive basis to revive Mickens’ petition | Miller/Montgomery and House create a retroactive rule applicable to life sentences without parole and proportionality challenges | Miller/Montgomery apply only to juvenile offenders; House is an Illinois state-law decision and not a U.S. or Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision for §9545(b)(1)(iii) purposes | Miller/Montgomery inapplicable because Mickens was 24 at the time of the offense; House cannot satisfy the §9545(b)(1)(iii) exception because it is an Illinois appellate decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory life-without-parole for juveniles unconstitutional)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (U.S. 2016) (Miller announced a new substantive rule that applies retroactively)
- Commonwealth v. Albrecht, 994 A.2d 1091 (Pa. 2010) (affirming dismissal of untimely PCRA petition without hearing where timeliness exception not established)
- Commonwealth v. Furgess, 149 A.3d 90 (Pa. Super. 2016) (Miller does not apply to offenders older than 18 at the time of the crime)
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 12 A.3d 477 (Pa. Super. 2011) (timeliness of PCRA petition is jurisdictional)
- People v. House, 72 N.E.3d 357 (Ill. App. Ct. 2015) (Illinois appellate decision holding life-without-parole for a 19-year-old lookout violated state proportionality clause)