Com. v. Seekins, S.
420 WDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 18, 2017Background
- Shawn Seekins pleaded guilty to corruption of minors on Sept. 9, 2016 and was sentenced Oct. 7, 2016 to 170–340 days’ incarceration followed by one year of consecutive probation; he was immediately paroled.
- Before his probationary term began, Seekins admitted at a Gagnon II hearing (Feb. 9, 2017) that he violated parole by causing a commotion at his high school, violating curfew, and being charged with new sexual offenses.
- The court revoked Seekins’ parole, ordered him to serve the remainder of his maximum sentence, then immediately re-paroled him.
- The court also revoked the consecutive probation (which had not yet commenced) and sentenced Seekins to 6 months to 2 years less one day in county jail.
- No motion to modify sentence was filed within 10 days; Seekins filed a timely direct appeal on March 10, 2017.
- Appointed counsel filed an Anders brief and petition to withdraw, concluding the appeal is frivolous; the Superior Court conducted independent review and affirmed the judgment of sentence and granted withdrawal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Seekins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether Seekins knowingly entered a guilty plea to parole/probation violation | Court adequately informed Seekins; plea valid | Seekins contends he did not know his admission could result in probation revocation | Waived for failure to raise below; record shows court advised him that parole violations also violate probation, so claim lacks merit |
| 2. Whether court may revoke probation before the probationary term begins | Probation can be revoked based on conduct after imposition but before commencement | Seekins argues probation hadn’t begun so it could not logically be revoked | Court may revoke probation prior to its commencement; Superior Court affirmed revocation and confinement as within trial court’s discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedural framework for counsel’s motion to withdraw on grounds of frivolous appeal)
- Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (due process requirements for parole revocation hearings)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (Anders briefs must discuss counsel’s reasons for concluding appeal is frivolous)
- Commonwealth v. Lilley, 978 A.2d 995 (Pa. Super. 2009) (standards for Anders compliance on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Hoover, 909 A.2d 321 (Pa. Super. 2006) (trial court may impose confinement after probation revocation when specific conditions exist)
- Commonwealth v. Wendowski, 420 A.2d 628 (Pa. Super. 1980) (term of probation includes period prior to commencement; revocation before service can be proper)