Com. v. Ward, J.
40 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- Justin Ward pleaded guilty on July 12, 2011, to two counts of delivery of a controlled substance and was sentenced to concurrent terms of 4 to 10 years.
- Ward did not file a direct appeal; his judgment of sentence became final on August 11, 2011.
- Ward filed an initial PCRA petition in September 2014; the court denied it in June 2015.
- On August 13, 2015, Ward filed a pro se "petition for writ of habeas corpus," which the court treated as a PCRA petition and appointed counsel.
- Counsel filed a Turner/Finley no‑merit letter; the court issued a Rule 907 notice and ultimately dismissed the petition as untimely on December 16, 2015.
- Ward appealed; the Superior Court affirmed, holding the petition was time‑barred and Alleyne does not provide a retroactive basis for the timeliness exception.
Issues
| Issue | Ward's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ward's 2015 petition was timely or saved by the "new constitutional right" exception (Alleyne) | Ward sought relief challenging legality of sentence and relied on Alleyne-based argument to overcome PCRA timeliness bar | Petition is a PCRA petition filed well after the one-year limit; Alleyne does not apply retroactively under Pennsylvania law, so the timeliness exception is unavailable | The petition was untimely; Alleyne cannot be invoked retroactively to excuse the late filing; dismissal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hackett, 956 A.2d 978 (Pa. 2008) (PCRA timeliness is jurisdictional)
- Commonwealth v. Concordia, 97 A.3d 366 (Pa. Super. 2014) (challenges to legality of sentence are cognizable under the PCRA)
- Commonwealth v. Deaner, 779 A.2d 578 (Pa. Super. 2001) (collateral petitions raising PCRA-type issues are treated as PCRA petitions)
- Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988) (standards for counsel withdrawal/no‑merit filings)
- Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (procedures for court review of appointed counsel's no‑merit letter)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (held that facts increasing mandatory minimums must be found by a jury)