Case Information
*1 J-A16001-16
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA Appellee :
:
v. :
:
WILLIAM COATES, III, :
: Appellant : No. 247 WDA 2015
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence January 13, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0012614-2013 BEFORE: SHOGAN, OLSON, and STRASSBURGER,* JJ.
DISSENTING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.:
FILED: September 28, 2016 Because I conclude that the facts of this case do not result in Appellant having waived his issues on appeal, I dissent. At sentencing, counsel for Appellant moved to withdraw, and the trial court stated that it would appoint counsel, and entered an order to that effect two days later. That order was not filed until five days after that, January 20, 2015. [1] Thus, Appellant was effectively not represented by counsel for at least 7 of the 10 days available to him for filing timely a post-sentence motion. Accordingly, I conclude that this situation is sufficiently analogous to the situation in Commonwealth v. *2 J-A16001-16
Leatherby , 116 A.3d 73, 79 (Pa. Super. 2015); [2] and constitutes a breakdown in the workings of the court. Thus, this Court is permitted to consider the issues raised in Appellant’s late-filed post-sentence motion.
[1] Moreover, appointed counsel from the public defender represents that her office did not receive notice of this appointment until sometime in early February. *Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
[2] While certain aspects are distinguishable, the principle in Leatehrby is applicable here. In that case, “the trial court did not appoint new counsel for Leatherby in time to preserve his post-sentence rights,” and he “was effectively abandoned by counsel.” 116 A.3d at 79. - 2 -