Commonwealth v. Williams
151 A.3d 621
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- Henry L. Williams was convicted by a jury in 2011 of corrupt organizations, criminal conspiracy, criminal use of a communication facility, and four counts of possession with intent to deliver; originally sentenced to 11–22 years including mandatory minimums under 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508.
- Williams’ direct appeal was affirmed in 2013; while that appeal was pending the U.S. Supreme Court decided Alleyne v. United States.
- Following Alleyne, Pennsylvania courts held many mandatory minimum statutes unconstitutional when judges — not juries — found facts increasing mandatory minimums; Williams obtained PCRA relief, his sentence was vacated, and he was resentenced in October 2015.
- A timely pro se notice of appeal was filed in the trial court (11/19/2015) while Williams had counsel; the pro se filing was docketed in the trial court but not forwarded to the Superior Court; counsel later filed a counseled notice of appeal, which was untimely.
- The Superior Court treated the trial court’s failure to forward the pro se notice as an administrative breakdown and held the pro se notice of appeal must be docketed under I.O.P. 65.24 and Ellis, so the appeal was accepted as timely.
- On the merits, Williams raised (1) sufficiency of the evidence for conspiracy and PWID counts and (2) that the court improperly used elevated offense gravity scores based on drug weights; the court held the sufficiency claim waived (previous direct appeal) and the OGS challenge waived for failure to preserve at sentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Williams' Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy and PWID when no physical drugs presented | Evidence was insufficient because no drugs or physical evidence were introduced at trial | The claim is procedurally barred because Williams already litigated his convictions on direct appeal | Waived — cannot relitigate convictions after earlier direct appeal (Anderson) |
| Use of elevated offense gravity scores based on drug weight without on-the-record findings | Trial court improperly elevated OGS relying on drug weight/jury findings without making weight findings at sentencing | Claim is waived because Williams did not preserve OGS challenge at sentencing or in post-sentence motion | Waived — discretionary-sentencing challenge not preserved (Moury); no relief |
| Timeliness of appeal given pro se notice filed while counsel represented Williams | Pro se notice was timely and should be treated as docketed under Ellis and I.O.P. 65.24; trial court’s failure to forward was administrative breakdown | Hybrid filings are generally nullities; pro se filings while represented have no tolling effect (Pa.R.Crim.P. 576) | Appeal accepted as timely due to requirement to docket pro se notices of appeal and due to administrative breakdown |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (U.S. 2013) (any fact that increases penalty must be treated as an element submitted to a jury)
- Commonwealth v. Newman, 99 A.3d 86 (Pa. Super. 2014) (Applies Alleyne to Pennsylvania mandatory minimum statutes)
- Commonwealth v. Vargas, 108 A.3d 858 (Pa. Super. 2014) (holds 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508 unconstitutional under Alleyne)
- Commonwealth v. Ellis, 626 A.2d 1137 (Pa. 1993) (permits docketing of pro se notice of appeal despite existence of counsel to protect constitutional right to appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Anderson, 801 A.2d 1264 (Pa. Super. 2002) (after remand and resentencing, only challenges to the new sentence are reviewable on second direct appeal)
- Commonwealth v. Moury, 992 A.2d 162 (Pa. Super. 2010) (four-part test for reviewing discretionary aspects of sentence)
- Commonwealth v. Leatherby, 116 A.3d 73 (Pa. Super. 2015) (appellate review should not be denied because of administrative breakdown by the trial court)