Com. v. Richardson, T., Com. v. Richardson, T. No. 3430 EDA 2016

Tyrone Richardson was convicted of first-degree murder in 1984 and sentenced to life on April 19, 1985; his direct appeal concluded July 23, 1987.
Richardson filed his first PCRA petition pro se on August 22, 2012, arguing Miller-based relief (challenging mandatory life-without-parole for young offenders).
The petition was dismissed by the PCRA court as untimely; this Court remanded in 2015 because counsel had not been appointed for the first PCRA petition.
Counsel was appointed, filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter concluding Miller/Montgomery do not apply because Richardson was 23 at the time of the crime.
The PCRA court again dismissed the petition on September 30, 2016; Richardson appealed pro se, raising Eighth Amendment and Equal Protection claims tied to extending Miller to ages 18–25.
The Superior Court affirmed dismissal, holding Richardson’s petition time‑barred because Miller applies only to offenders under 18 and he did not satisfy a PCRA timeliness exception.

Issue	Richardson's Argument	Commonwealth/PCRA Court's Argument	Held
Whether the court erred by denying a hearing on whether mandatory life‑without‑parole for ages 18–25 violates Equal Protection	Miller’s rationale (diminished culpability / brain development) should extend to 18–25 year‑olds; denying relief is unequal treatment	Miller applies only to those under 18; Richardson was 23 and cannot invoke Miller to satisfy PCRA timeliness exceptions	Denied — Miller does not extend to 18–25; no equal protection relief and petition untimely
Whether the court erred by denying a hearing on whether mandatory life‑without‑parole for ages 18–25 violates the Eighth Amendment	The Eighth Amendment’s protection recognized in Miller should apply to similarly situated 18–25 year‑olds due to neuroscientific findings	Miller is limited to juveniles under 18; Montgomery confirmed Miller’s retroactivity but not extension to older offenders; Richardson is outside Miller’s scope	Denied — Eighth Amendment rule in Miller limited to <18; petition time‑barred

Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (holding mandatory life without parole for offenders under 18 violates the Eighth Amendment)
Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (holding Miller applies retroactively on collateral review)
Commonwealth v. Cintora, 69 A.3d 759 (Pa. Super. 2013) (refusing to extend Miller to offenders older than 18 based on brain development arguments)
Commonwealth v. Furgess, 149 A.3d 90 (Pa. Super. 2016) (reaffirming that Miller does not apply to those older than 18 for PCRA timeliness exception)
Commonwealth v. Albrecht, 994 A.2d 1091 (Pa. 2010) (PCRA time limits are jurisdictional; courts lack authority to reach untimely claims)