Com. v. Perez, P., Com. v. Perez, P. No. 1800 MDA 2016

Percy Perez was convicted by a jury (Nov. 7, 1997) of second-degree murder, rape, and related offenses for the sexual assault and death of a 16-month-old child.
After direct appeal and remand, Perez was re-sentenced on June 26, 2000 to an aggregate life term.
Perez filed a first PCRA petition in 2001; the instant pro se PCRA petition was filed March 28, 2016 as a serial petition.
Perez argued his life sentence is unconstitutional under Miller v. Alabama and Montgomery v. Louisiana, claiming entitlement to re-sentencing.
The PCRA court dismissed the petition without a hearing on September 29, 2016 as untimely under the one-year PCRA time-bar (42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(b)(1)), absent a statutory exception.
The Superior Court affirmed, holding Miller/Montgomery inapplicable because Perez was 19 at the time of the offense, and therefore could not invoke the PCRA timeliness exception.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of PCRA petition	Perez: Miller/Montgomery render his life sentence unconstitutional and supply a basis to overcome the PCRA one-year time bar	Commonwealth: Petition is untimely; Miller applies only to offenders under 18 at offense date, so no timeliness exception	Petition dismissed as untimely; Miller/Montgomery inapplicable because Perez was 19 at the crime

Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (U.S. 2012) (holding mandatory life without parole for offenders under 18 violates the Eighth Amendment)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (U.S. 2016) (holding Miller rule applies retroactively on collateral review)
Commonwealth v. Cintora, 69 A.3d 759 (Pa. Super. 2013) (held Miller cannot support PCRA timeliness exception for offenders who were 18 or older)