Com. v. Pagan, M.
287 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 19, 2017Background
- Miguel Angel Pagan pled guilty on August 15, 2012 to multiple sexual offenses (including IDSI) against a single 15-year-old victim in two cases and received an aggregate sentence of 8 to 16 years.
- He did not file post-sentence motions or a direct appeal; his judgment of sentence became final on September 14, 2012.
- Pagan filed a pro se PCRA petition on June 22, 2015; appointed counsel filed a no-merit letter and the petition was dismissed; the Superior Court affirmed and the Supreme Court denied review in October 2016.
- While his petition for allowance of appeal was pending, Pagan filed a motion on August 15, 2016 seeking vacatur/resentencing based on Alleyne/Wolfe; the trial court treated it as a PCRA petition and dismissed it as untimely for lack of jurisdiction.
- Pagan appealed pro se, arguing the PCRA time‑bar exceptions applied (relying on Alleyne and Wolfe); the Superior Court reviewed timeliness de novo and affirmed the dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Pagan’s PCRA petition invoking Alleyne/Wolfe fits a timeliness exception | Pagan argued Alleyne/Wolfe created a newly recognized constitutional right or newly discovered facts that excuse the untimely filing | Commonwealth/PCRA court argued Alleyne/Wolfe do not apply retroactively here and Alleyne is inapplicable because Pagan’s sentence was not a mandatory minimum | Court held petition untimely; Pagan failed to plead/prove any §9545(b) exception; dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (holding facts that increase mandatory penalty are elements for jury)
- Commonwealth v. Wolfe, 140 A.3d 651 (Pa. 2016) (addressing mandatory minimum under §9718 in light of Alleyne)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review)
- Commonwealth v. Robinson, 139 A.3d 178 (Pa. 2016) (PCRA timeliness is jurisdictional and exceptions are exclusive)
- Commonwealth v. Jackson, 30 A.3d 516 (Pa. Super. 2011) (untimely PCRA petitions must be dismissed if no exception proven)