Com. v. Poole, P.
Com. v. Poole, P. No. 1913 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | May 1, 2017Background
- Perry Poole was convicted by jury of first‑degree murder, robbery, conspiracy, and PIC for crimes committed December 9, 1989; he was over 18 at the time and received a mandatory life sentence.
- Direct appeal affirmed in 1993 and Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal; Poole filed two prior PCRA petitions that were denied.
- Poole filed a third PCRA petition on July 13, 2010, invoking Graham and later Miller, and supplemented it after Montgomery (filed Feb. 16, 2016).
- The PCRA court issued a Rule 907 notice and ultimately dismissed the 2010 petition and later supplements as untimely on May 18, 2016.
- Poole argued Miller and Montgomery created a new retroactive constitutional right to avoid the PCRA time‑bar, despite being older than 18 at the offense; the Superior Court reviewed only timeliness and jurisdictional issues.
Issues
| Issue | Poole's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the PCRA court erred by dismissing without a hearing | Poole contended factual/legal issues warranted a hearing | Commonwealth maintained petition was facially untimely and barred, so no hearing required | Dismissal affirmed; court may dispose of untimely petitions without a hearing when jurisdictional time‑bar applies |
| Whether Miller/Montgomery creates a retroactive right applying to Poole | Poole argued Miller/Montgomery announced a new, retroactive right that excuses the PCRA time bar | Commonwealth argued Miller/Montgomery protects only those <18 at offense and thus does not apply to Poole, who was >18 | Held Miller/Montgomery do not help Poole because they apply only to defendants who were under 18 at the time of their crimes; petition remains untimely |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wilson, 824 A.2d 331 (Pa. Super. 2003) (standard of review for PCRA dismissal)
- Commonwealth v. Whitney, 817 A.2d 473 (Pa. 2003) (PCRA timeliness is jurisdictional)
- Commonwealth v. Copenhefer, 941 A.2d 646 (Pa. 2007) (one‑year filing rule and 60‑day exception explained)
- Commonwealth v. Furgess, 149 A.3d 90 (Pa. Super. 2016) (Miller does not apply to defendants older than 18 at the time of the offense)