Commonwealth v. Tann
79 A.3d 1130
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- Appellant Shawn Tann pled guilty in 2004 to possession with intent to deliver (PWID) heroin and crack; plea colloquy incorrectly stated a 10-year statutory maximum (but Tann had a 1999 PWID conviction).
- Sentenced per plea agreement to 1½–23 months plus treatment and 24 months reporting probation; later multiple VOPs led to repeated resentencings and periods of incarceration and probation.
- In 2011 the court found Tann violated probation and learned his 1999 Delaware PWID conviction made him a drug recidivist under 35 P.S. § 780-115, which doubles the statutory maximum to 20 years.
- At the March 6, 2012 VOP resentencing the court imposed 5½ to 11 years for the PWID VOP (within the 20-year statutory maximum for recidivists).
- Tann appealed, arguing the VOP sentence was illegal because the plea colloquy’s 10-year maximum bound the court at resentencing. The trial court relied on precedent allowing resentencing up to the statutory maximum regardless of a plea bargain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the VOP court could impose a sentence exceeding the 10-year maximum stated in the plea colloquy given a prior undisclosed conviction | Tann: plea colloquy’s stated 10-year maximum limits resentencing; court may not impose a greater sentence at VOP | Commonwealth / trial court: court may resentence to any sentence available at original sentencing (statutory maximum 20 years for recidivist) despite plea colloquy error | Court held the VOP court could impose sentence up to the statutory maximum (20 years); Tann’s 5½–11 year term was legal |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wallace, 870 A.2d 838 (Pa. 2005) (trial court at probation revocation may impose any sentence permitted by statute and is not bound by plea agreement limits)
- Commonwealth v. Mazzetti, 44 A.3d 58 (Pa. 2012) (if prosecution fails to satisfy statutory prerequisites for a mandatory minimum at original sentencing, that mandatory minimum cannot be imposed at resentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Simmons, 56 A.3d 1280 (Pa. Super. 2012) (scope of review for probation revocation sentencing and limits tied to original available sentencing alternatives)
- Commonwealth v. MacGregor, 912 A.2d 315 (Pa. Super. 2006) (probation revocation sentencing limited by what was available at original sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Raphael, 879 A.2d 1264 (Pa. Super. 2005) (court not bound by plea agreement sentencing terms at revocation)
- Commonwealth v. Parsons, 969 A.2d 1259 (Pa. Super. 2009) (en banc) (after VOP, court has full panoply of sentencing options; plea bargain sentencing term no longer binding)
- Commonwealth v. Hodges, 789 A.2d 764 (Pa. Super. 2002) (defendant may withdraw plea if actual sentence exceeds what defendant reasonably believed was the maximum)
- Commonwealth v. Aponte, 855 A.2d 800 (Pa. 2004) (statutory recidivist enhancements depend on existence of prior convictions in the record and do not require additional factual findings)