Commonwealth v. Orlando, 156 A.3d 1274

Appellant Michael Anthony Orlando appeals a PCRA dismissal by the Montgomery County court.
Grand jury presentment in a multi-county drug case found a trafficking network with fourteen members.
Orlando obtained multi-ounce cocaine quantities from Richard Derosa and was identified as a Derosa customer in 2010.
At trial, Orlando pled guilty to one cocaine possession-with-intent-to-deliver count and one corrupt organizations count; remaining charges were nolle-pros’d.
A RRRI-based sentence was imposed; Orlando later pursued post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of counsel in the plea to corrupt organizations.
PCRA court rejected the claims; Orlando appeals arguing counsel erred by not challenging the predicate offense for racketeering under the corrupt organizations statute.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Is counsel ineffective for permitting a guilty plea to corrupt organizations based on cocaine as predicate offense?	Orlando argues cocaine isn’t a narcotic under 35 P.S. § 780-113, so not a valid racketeering predicate.	Court cites that cocaine remains a Schedule II substance; precedent allows broad racketeering activity under 18 Pa.C.S. § 911(h)(1).	No, claim lacks arguable merit; ineffective assistance not shown.

Commonwealth v. Treiber, 121 A.3d 435 (Pa. 2015) (limits of PCRA relief and three-pronged test for ineffectiveness)
Commonwealth v. Lynch, 820 A.2d 728 (Pa. Super. 2003) (ineffectiveness standard for plea proceedings)
Commonwealth v. Kersteter, 877 A.2d 466 (Pa. Super. 2005) (withdraw plea if ineffective assistance caused involuntariness)
Commonwealth v. Mendoza, 730 A.2d 503 (Pa. Super. 1999) (plea withdrawal relies on voluntariness of plea)
Commonwealth v. Barnes, 687 A.2d 1163 (Pa. Super. 1997) (bound by statements in plea colloquy)
Commonwealth v. Carter, 656 A.2d 463 (Pa. 1995) (presumption of effective counsel in plea)