Com. v. Seskey, R.
170 A.3d 1105
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2017Background
- In 1992, Regis Seskey, a minor, fatally shot Marc Bova; Seskey was convicted of first-degree murder in 1994 and originally sentenced to mandatory life without parole (LWOP).
- Seskey filed multiple PCRA petitions; after Montgomery v. Louisiana, he filed a timely third petition and the Commonwealth conceded he was entitled to resentencing.
- On November 16, 2016, the trial court resentenced Seskey to 13–26 years; a post-sentence motion led the court to recommend immediate parole on December 5, 2016.
- The Commonwealth appealed, arguing the trial court erred by not imposing a maximum sentence of life imprisonment (with parole eligibility framework dictated by Batts decisions and 18 Pa.C.S. § 1102/§ 1102.1).
- The Superior Court held that, under Commonwealth v. Batts (Batts II), minors convicted of first- or second-degree murder before June 25, 2012 must be resentenced with a maximum term of life imprisonment, so Seskey’s 26-year maximum was illegal.
- The Superior Court affirmed in part, vacated the illegal portion of the sentence, and remanded solely for resentencing to impose a life maximum and an appropriate minimum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Seskey) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by refusing to impose a maximum sentence of life imprisonment on a minor convicted pre-June 25, 2012 | Section 1102(a) requires a life maximum; Batts II confirms resentenced juveniles must have a life maximum; trial court’s 26-year maximum is illegal | Trial court has unfettered discretion on minimum and maximum at resentencing (relying on Batts I and other authorities) | Held for Commonwealth: Batts II requires a life maximum; 26-year maximum was illegal and vacated |
| Whether the trial court abused discretion by not imposing life as the maximum (merits of sentence severity) | Life maximum with a court-determined minimum is appropriate; Commonwealth argued life maximum was not an abuse | Seskey argued the imposed range was within sentencing discretion and appropriate | Not reached (court vacated sentence on legality grounds and remanded for resentencing) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Batts, 163 A.3d 410 (Pa. 2017) (Batts II) (holds resentenced juveniles convicted pre–June 25, 2012 are subject to life maximum; courts set minimum)
- Commonwealth v. Batts, 66 A.3d 286 (Pa. 2013) (Batts I) (earlier interpretation of interplay between §1102 and parole statute)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (U.S. 2016) (made Miller retroactive, triggering resentencing eligibility)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment)
- Commonwealth v. Barnes, 151 A.3d 121 (Pa. 2016) (addresses sentencing legality principles)
- Commonwealth v. Vazquez, 744 A.2d 1280 (Pa. 2000) (failure to impose a statutory minimum or maximum implicates sentence legality)