Com. v. Owens, K., Com. v. Owens, K. No. 1701 MDA 2016

Kent Norris Owens was convicted by a jury on September 9, 2010 of aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, and assault of a law enforcement officer; sentenced October 22, 2010 to 20–40 years.
Direct appeal and reargument were denied; Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal on November 14, 2012; judgment of sentence became final for PCRA purposes in December 2012/February 2013.
Owens filed a first PCRA petition (filed August 28, 2013) which was denied January 12, 2015; appellate review and the Supreme Court denial concluded in December 2015.
Owens filed a second PCRA petition on July 5, 2016. The PCRA court issued a Rule 907 notice August 15, 2016 proposing dismissal as untimely and explaining timeliness rules.
The PCRA court dismissed the second petition as untimely on September 7, 2016 because it was filed more than one year after the judgment became final and Owens did not plead or prove any statutory timeliness exception.
Owens appealed but failed to timely file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement (requested extension denied); the Superior Court found the issue waived and, alternatively, affirmed on timeliness grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the PCRA court erred in denying Owens's ineffective-assistance (layered) claim on second PCRA petition	Owens argued trial/appellate counsel were ineffective (layered ineffectiveness) and that the merits should be reached	Commonwealth/PCRA court argued petition was a second/subsequent petition filed beyond the PCRA one-year time bar and Owens failed to plead/prove any exception	Superior Court held issue waived for failure to file Rule 1925(b) statement; alternatively, petition was untimely and no timeliness exception was pled, so court lacked jurisdiction to reach the merits
Whether Owens preserved claims for appeal by requesting a late extension to file Rule 1925(b) statement	Owens sought an extension after the deadline, asserting incarceration as reason	PCRA court denied extension; Commonwealth argued failure to file 1925(b) waives issues	Held: Owens failed to preserve issues; appeal waived for lack of timely Rule 1925(b) statement

Commonwealth v. Abu-Jamal, 596 Pa. 219, 941 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2008) (PCRA timeliness is jurisdictional; petitioner must plead and prove an exception)
Greater Erie Indus. Dev. Corp. v. Presque Isle Downs, Inc., 88 A.3d 222 (Pa. Super. 2014) (failure to comply with trial court's order to file a Rule 1925(b) statement results in waiver)
Commonwealth v. Lord, 719 A.2d 306 (Pa. 1998) (appellate issues not raised in a timely Rule 1925(b) statement are deemed waived)