Com. v. Woodruff, M.
1103 EDA 2017
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Dec 19, 2017Background
- In 2005 Woodruff shot and paralyzed the victim; after retrial she was convicted of aggravated assault, REAP, and possession of an instrument of crime.
- On May 28, 2010 the trial court sentenced Woodruff to a mandatory minimum 5–10 years for aggravated assault (under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9712) plus consecutive time for PIC; she did not file a direct appeal.
- Woodruff filed a PCRA petition raising ineffective assistance of trial counsel and seeking retroactive application of Alleyne; counsel amended to emphasize an Apprendi-based ineffective assistance claim.
- Alleyne v. United States was decided on June 17, 2013, after Woodruff’s judgment of sentence was final (final June 28, 2010); Woodruff argued counsel should have challenged the mandatory minimum earlier.
- The PCRA court dismissed the petition without a hearing as meritless (907 notice sent; no reply), finding any Apprendi challenge before Alleyne was meritless under existing Pennsylvania precedent and Alleyne did not apply retroactively to final sentences.
- Superior Court affirmed, adopting the PCRA court’s reasoning that counsel was not ineffective and Alleyne does not retroactively apply to Woodruff’s final sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the mandatory minimum sentence | Woodruff: trial counsel should have challenged the mandatory minimum (Apprendi/Alleyne theory) | Commonwealth: challenge would have been meritless at sentencing; Alleyne was decided after sentence was final and is not retroactive | Court held counsel not ineffective; challenge was meritless under then-controlling law and Alleyne does not apply retroactively to final sentences |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013) (mandatory-minimum–related facts are elements that must be found by a jury)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (any fact increasing punishment beyond statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury)
- Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002) (declined to extend Apprendi to mandatory minimums; later overruled by Alleyne)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review to cases with final judgments)
- Commonwealth v. Kleinicke, 895 A.2d 562 (Pa. Super. 2006) (Pennsylvania court upholding mandatory-minimum scheme against Apprendi challenge before Alleyne)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 102 A.3d 988 (Pa. Super. 2014) (discussing retroactivity principles for new constitutional rules)