Com. v. Wright, E., Jr.
70 MDA 2017
Pa. Super. Ct.Sep 19, 2017Background
- Appellant Edward N. Wright, Jr. was convicted by jury in 1998 of multiple robberies, aggravated assaults, and conspiracies and sentenced to an aggregate 35–70 years, including mandatory minimums under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9712 for firearm use.
- Direct appeal was denied; judgment of sentence became final in 2000 after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal.
- In March 2016 Wright filed a pro se PCRA petition arguing his mandatory-minimum sentence is illegal under Alleyne v. United States.
- Counsel filed a Turner/Finley no-merit letter and moved to withdraw; the PCRA court issued a Rule 907 notice finding the petition untimely and relying on Commonwealth v. Washington to hold Alleyne is non-retroactive on collateral review.
- Wright filed a response; the PCRA court dismissed the petition on November 23, 2016 for lack of jurisdiction due to untimeliness. Wright appealed and this Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Wright) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth/PCRA court) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alleyne creates a timeliness exception allowing collateral relief | Alleyne announced a constitutional rule (jury must find facts triggering mandatory minimums) that should apply retroactively; Montgomery supports retroactivity | Alleyne is procedural and Washington holds it does not apply retroactively; petition is untimely and no exception applies | Alleyne is non-retroactive on collateral review; petition dismissed as untimely |
| Whether Montgomery (on Miller) changes retroactivity analysis for Alleyne | Montgomery requires retroactive application of certain new rules; thus §9712 should be void ab initio | Montgomery addressed a substantive rule (Miller); Alleyne is procedural and Montgomery’s rationale does not apply; also facts differ (not a juvenile LWOP case) | Montgomery does not compel retroactive application of Alleyne; inapplicable |
| Whether Wright filed within 60 days of the claim becoming available | Alleged Alleyne-based right only recognized after Alleyne; his 2016 petition counts as within the exception | Even if Alleyne were retroactive, Wright did not file within 60 days of Alleyne (2013); Washington forecloses the exception anyway | Petition not filed within 60 days of Alleyne; timeliness exception not met |
| Procedural: Whether appeal is timely | Wright dated his notice of appeal Dec. 18, 2016; prisoner mailbox rule applies | Commonwealth did not contest timeliness; court found filing plausibly timely under mailbox rule | Appeal not quashed; merits considered but petition dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (facts that increase mandatory minimums must be found by a jury)
- Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review)
- Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S. Ct. 718 (U.S. 2016) (Miller announced a substantive rule that is retroactive)
- Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (U.S. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles violates Eighth Amendment)
- Commonwealth v. Secreti, 134 A.3d 77 (Pa. Super. 2016) (discussing 60‑day filing requirement when a new federal or state constitutional right is recognized)
- Commonwealth v. Wright, 739 A.2d 573 (Pa. Super. 1999) (direct-appeal disposition)
- Commonwealth v. Valentine, 101 A.3d 801 (Pa. Super. 2014) (discussion of §9712 and mandatory minimums)