Commonwealth v. Olson, 179 A.3d 1134

Jeffrey Alan Olson pled guilty to one count of DUI on September 18, 2015; no plea agreement on sentence.
On December 21, 2015, the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence including a mandatory minimum under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3804(c)(3) for refusing a blood test (one year imprisonment plus fine).
Olson did not file a direct appeal; his judgment of sentence became final on January 20, 2016.
Olson filed a pro se PCRA petition on August 17, 2016, challenging the mandatory minimum in light of Birchfield v. North Dakota.
The PCRA court appointed counsel, held a hearing, and dismissed the petition on December 22, 2016; Olson timely appealed.
The Superior Court considered whether Birchfield announced a new substantive rule that must be applied retroactively on collateral review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Olson waived the constitutional challenge to his sentence	Olson: legality issues cannot be waived and were properly raised in his PCRA petition	Commonwealth/PCRA court: procedural objections raised but waiver not applicable to legality claims	Court: legality of sentence cannot be waived, but must be timely raised in a PCRA petition over which court has jurisdiction
Whether Birchfield applies retroactively to sentences final before decision	Olson: Birchfield creates a new substantive rule that is fully retroactive on timely collateral review	Commonwealth: Birchfield is not substantive for these sentencing enhancements and thus not retroactive to finalized sentences	Court: Birchfield is procedural (affects sentencing method), not a new substantive rule; does not apply retroactively to cases whose judgments were final before Birchfield
Whether appellate rights should be reinstated nunc pro tunc on equitable grounds	Olson: equitable fairness supports reinstating appellate rights	Commonwealth/PCRA court: no statutory basis in PCRA for such unrestricted equitable relief	Court: Equitable reinstatement not available absent PCRA authorization; claim denied

Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (U.S. 2016) (warrantless blood tests cannot be imposed as a penalty for refusal under implied-consent laws)
Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (any fact increasing mandatory minimum must be found by a jury)
Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (U.S. 1989) (framework for retroactivity of new rules on collateral review)
Commonwealth v. Riggle, 119 A.3d 1058 (Pa. Super. 2015) (declining to apply Alleyne retroactively to sentences final before Alleyne)
Commonwealth v. Ennels, 167 A.3d 716 (Pa. Super. 2017) (applying Birchfield to invalidate enhanced penalties tied to refusal to submit to blood testing)
Commonwealth v. Washington, 142 A.3d 810 (Pa. 2016) (new rules do not automatically render final, pre-existing sentences illegal)