Com. v. Taylor, C., Jr.
931 MDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 20, 2017Background
- Calvin E. Taylor, Jr. pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated indecent assault and was sentenced on December 3, 2014 to 60–120 months’ incarceration; no direct appeal was filed.
- Taylor filed a pro se PCRA petition on August 5, 2016 (later amended), alleging his plea/sentence was tainted by reference to a mandatory minimum.
- He relied on Alleyne and on a trial-court decision (Commonwealth v. Carey) arguing mandatory-minimum discussion rendered his plea involuntary and should be given retroactive effect.
- The PCRA court held Taylor’s petition untimely under the one-year PCRA filing rule and found no applicable statutory exception.
- The PCRA court also factually found the mandatory minimum did not influence plea negotiations (no notice filed, guideline form and plea colloquy did not reference a mandatory minimum).
- The Superior Court affirmed, concluding it lacked jurisdiction over the untimely petition and agreed Carey was inapplicable/distinguishable even if retroactive.
Issues
| Issue | Taylor's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PCRA petition was timely or an exception applies | Petition timely under retroactivity of decisions invalidating mandatory minima (relying on Carey/Ross/Alleyne) | Petition untimely; no §9545(b) exception applies because Alleyne was decided before sentencing and Carey is not binding | Petition untimely; no statutory exception shown; PCRA court lacked jurisdiction — affirmed |
| Whether plea/sentence was tainted by discussion of a mandatory minimum | Plea was induced/tainted because mandatory minimum was discussed during negotiations/sentencing | Record shows no notice to seek mandatory minimum; guideline form and plea colloquy did not reference it; only one ambiguous mention at sentencing | PCRA court found mandatory-minimum did not influence plea negotiations; plea not tainted — affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (facts that increase a mandatory minimum must be found by jury beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Commonwealth v. Hopkins, 117 A.3d 247 (Pa. 2015) (applies Alleyne to Pennsylvania sentencing context)
- Commonwealth v. Ross, 140 A.3d 55 (Pa. Super. 2016) (discusses retroactivity of new rules under Teague framework)
- Commonwealth v. Bennett, 930 A.2d 1264 (Pa. 2007) (PCRA jurisdictional time limits are mandatory)
- Commonwealth v. Carr, 768 A.2d 1164 (Pa. Super. 2001) (petitioner must plead and prove facts showing timely invocation of §9545(b) exception)
- Commonwealth v. Fairiror, 809 A.2d 396 (Pa. Super. 2002) (PCRA court lacks jurisdiction to hear untimely petitions)