Commonwealth v. Cook
175 A.3d 345
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2017Background
- Patrick L. Cook was convicted by a jury (pro se with standby counsel) of aggravated indecent assault, indecent assault, and corruption of minors for offenses against two girls under 13 (2004–2007) and an additional 2010 offense.
- Original sentencing imposed aggregate 11–22 years including two mandatory minimums for aggravated indecent assault; Cook was designated a sexually violent predator and advised of lifetime reporting.
- Cook did not file a direct appeal; he filed a timely PCRA petition in 2015 challenging waiver-of-counsel issues. This Court denied relief on counsel-related claims but sua sponte vacated the unconstitutional mandatory minimums and remanded for resentencing.
- On remand (Feb. 2, 2017) the trial court resentenced Cook without the mandatory minimums to an aggregate 10–20 years (lower than the original aggregate). Cook did not file post-sentence motions but filed a direct appeal.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief and petition to withdraw. The Superior Court conducted an independent review, considered counsel’s proposed issues, and Cook’s pro se response, and concluded none had arguable merit. The judgment of sentence was affirmed and counsel’s withdrawal was granted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Cook) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth / Respondent) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Propriety/legality of resentencing under Alleyne | Resentencing was improper following remand | Resentencing complied with remit: mandatory minimums not applied; sentence within statutory ranges; credit for time served | No viable legality challenge; sentence lawful and within statutory limits |
| Discretionary aspects of sentence | Sentence excessive / improper | No preservation: no post-sentence motion or objection at sentencing; sentence is standard-range and largely concurrent | Waived; no substantial question presented; claim frivolous |
| Sufficiency of evidence / witness credibility / perjury | Trial errors: inconsistent witness statements, perjury, Commonwealth failed to meet burden | These issues relate to guilt-phase and were waived by Cook’s failure to file a direct appeal after original sentencing; remand limited to resentencing issues | Waived and frivolous on this appeal (outside scope of remand) |
| Commonwealth subornation of perjury | Commonwealth induced victims to lie | No record support; assertions unsupported and outside scope of remand | Frivolous; no merit |
| Conspiracy by Mifflin and Franklin counties (Barr claim) | Counties conspired to violate constitutional rights under Barr | Barr concerns unrelated facts (defendants/DoJ sentencing deviation); no evidence of inter-county conspiracy here | Frivolous; Barr inapplicable; no record support |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural requirements when counsel seeks to withdraw on appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (requirements for Anders brief in Pennsylvania)
- Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717 (Pa. Super. 2007) (Anders procedure and appellate review)
- Commonwealth v. Bennett, 124 A.3d 327 (Pa. Super. 2015) (scope of independent review when Anders brief filed)
- Commonwealth v. McKeever, 947 A.2d 782 (Pa. Super. 2008) (limits on raising guilt-phase claims after remand for resentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Samuel, 102 A.3d 1001 (Pa. Super. 2014) (factors for invoking appellate jurisdiction over discretionary aspects of sentence)
- Commonwealth v. Kalichak, 943 A.2d 285 (Pa. Super. 2008) (waiver/frivolity for unpreserved sentencing claims)
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (holding affecting mandatory minimums and sentencing procedures)
- U.S. v. Barr, 963 F.2d 641 (3d Cir. 1992) (third-circuit case relied on by appellant; court found it inapplicable here)