Com. v. Monroe, E., Com. v. Monroe, E. No. 1523 WDA 2016

Background

Edward Layman Monroe was convicted by jury in 1997 of first-degree murder, retaliation against a witness, and conspiracy and sentenced to life imprisonment. His direct appeals were exhausted by 1999.
Monroe filed a timely first PCRA in 2000 which was denied and that denial was affirmed on appeal in 2001.
On March 24, 2016, Monroe submitted a pro se filing seeking resentencing/relief; the trial court treated it as a second PCRA petition and found it untimely.
Monroe argued his petition fit the PCRA’s newly-recognized constitutional-right exception, relying on the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Alleyne and Montgomery, and sought to qualify under the 60-day filing rule for newly recognized rights.
The trial court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the petition was filed well after the one-year PCRA deadline and Monroe did not establish any timeliness exception.
The Superior Court affirmed: Montgomery (juvenile LWOP retroactivity) did not help Monroe (he was an adult when he committed the offense); Alleyne was not timely asserted and has not been held retroactive for collateral review in Pennsylvania.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the pro se filing should be analyzed as a PCRA petition and is timely	Monroe urged relief and claimed exceptions based on new constitutional decisions	Commonwealth argued the filing asserts PCRA claims and is a second, untimely PCRA petition	Court held the filing is a PCRA petition (second PCRA) and is untimely under §9545(b)(1)
Whether Montgomery creates a timeliness exception for Monroe	Monroe invoked Montgomery (retroactivity of Miller) as a newly recognized constitutional right within 60 days	Commonwealth argued Montgomery concerns juvenile LWOP and is inapplicable because Monroe was an adult at offense	Court held Montgomery inapplicable because Montgomery/Miller only concern juvenile offenders; Monroe was not a juvenile
Whether Alleyne constitutes a new constitutional right that applies retroactively to Monroe’s collateral petition	Monroe invoked Alleyne (sentencing facts must be found beyond reasonable doubt) as newly recognized right under §9545(b)(1)(iii)	Commonwealth argued Alleyne was decided in 2013 and Monroe filed in 2016 (beyond 60 days) and Pennsylvania courts have not made Alleyne retroactive on collateral review	Court held Monroe failed the 60-day requirement and Alleyne has not been held retroactive for collateral review in Pennsylvania
Whether an illegal sentencing claim avoids PCRA time bars	Monroe asserted illegality of sentence which he implies is not time-barred	Commonwealth relied on precedent that illegal sentencing claims remain subject to PCRA time limits unless an exception applies	Court held illegality claims are cognizable under PCRA but still subject to the PCRA time limits or an applicable exception

Key Cases Cited

Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (facts increasing mandatory minimum must be found by jury beyond reasonable doubt)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (2016) (Miller rule given retroactive effect on collateral review for juvenile LWOP)
Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012) (mandatory life-without-parole for juvenile homicide unconstitutional)
Commonwealth v. Fahy, 737 A.2d 214 (Pa. 1999) (legality-of-sentence claims remain subject to PCRA time limits)
Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne not retroactive to cases on collateral review where judgment was already final)
Commonwealth v. Marshall, 947 A.2d 714 (Pa. 2008) (petitioner bears burden to plead and prove a timeliness exception)
Commonwealth v. Taylor, 65 A.3d 462 (Pa. Super. 2013) (PCRA is sole vehicle for collateral relief; filing deadlines are jurisdictional)
Commonwealth v. Jackson, 30 A.3d 516 (Pa. Super. 2011) (legality-of-sentence claims fall under the PCRA)
Commonwealth v. Secreti, 134 A.3d 77 (Pa. Super. 2016) (60-day rule runs from date of germane decision when invoking §9545(b)(1)(iii))
Commonwealth v. Patterson, 931 A.2d 710 (Pa. Super. 2007) (prisoner mailbox rule for filing dates)