Commonwealth v. Robinson
12 A.3d 477
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Robinson was sentenced in 1990 to life for first-degree murder and 2.5–5 years for possession of an instrument of crime, with direct appeal exhausted by 1991.
- Robinson filed six PCRA petitions across 1991–2009; the sixth petition was filed February 11, 2009 and dismissed as untimely.
- The court and appellate courts repeatedly rejected earlier petitions as untimely and held that Collins and subsequent cases did not create a timely 'newly discovered fact' exception.
- The instant petition argued the Bennett decision (announced August 23, 2007) created a new basis for relief under the PCRA’s timing exceptions.
- Robinson did not file within 60 days of Bennett and his sixth petition was filed well over a year after Bennett, triggering §9545(b)(2)’s sixty-day clock or the applicable exceptions.
- This Court held the PCRA petition was untimely and failed to satisfy any jurisdictional exception, affirming dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sixth PCRA petition is timely | Robinson | Commonwealth | Untimely; jurisdictional requirement not met |
| Whether Bennett constitutes a new fact under §9545(b)(1)(ii) | Robinson | Commonwealth | No; Bennett not a ‘new fact’ under the narrowly drawn exception |
| Whether the sixth petition can be treated as an amended/relief-petition under §9545(b)(2) timing | Robinson | Commonwealth | Not allowed; cannot repackage untimely petition as amended |
| Whether recharacterization of the petition affects timeliness given prior petitions | Robinson | Commonwealth | Not persuasive; no pending third petition to amend |
| Whether any broad equitable approach applies to tolling in this case | Robinson | Commonwealth | Equitable tolling not available; time limits are jurisdictional |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hackett, 598 Pa. 350 (Pa. 2008) (timeliness is a jurisdictional prerequisite)
- Commonwealth v. Bretz, 830 A.2d 1273 (Pa. Super. 2003) (timeliness framework; one-year limitation)
- Commonwealth v. Vega, 754 A.2d 714 (Pa. Super. 2000) (timeliness; limitations period analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Fahy, 558 Pa. 313 (Pa. 1999) (finality and limits on equitable tolling)
- Commonwealth v. Sam, 597 Pa. 523 (Pa. 2008) (finality and purpose of PCRA)
- Commonwealth v. Monaco, 996 A.2d 1076 (Pa. Super. 2010) (PCRA timing guidance; lack of relief under attempted exceptions)
- Commonwealth v. Collins, 585 Pa. 45 (Pa. 2005) (Collins decision on newly discovered facts; timing implications)
- Commonwealth v. Gamboa-Taylor, 562 Pa. 70 (Pa. 2000) (sixty-day statute of limitations for exceptions)
- Commonwealth v. Baldwin, 789 A.2d 751 (Pa. Super. 2001) (start of sixty-day period after judicial decision)