234 Pa. Code Rule 907
Except as provided in Rule 909 for death penalty cases,
(5) When the petition is granted without a hearing, the judge promptly shall issue an order granting a specific form of relief, and issue any supplementary orders appropriate to the proper disposition of the case. The order shall be filed and served as provided in Rule 114.
Comment
The judge is permitted, pursuant to paragraph (1), to summarily dismiss a petition for post-conviction collateral relief in certain limited cases. To determine whether a summary dismissal is appropriate, the judge should thoroughly review the petition, the answer, if any, and all other relevant information that is included in the record. If, after this review, the judge determines that the petition is patently frivolous and without support in the record, or that the facts alleged would not, even if proven, entitle the defendant to relief, or that there are no genuine issues of fact, the judge may dismiss the petition as provided herein.
A summary dismissal would also be authorized under this rule if the judge determines that a previous petition involving the same issue or issues was filed and was finally determined adversely to the defendant. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(b) for the timing requirements for filing second and subsequent petitions.
Second or subsequent petitions will not be entertained unless a strong prima facie showing is offered to demonstrate that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred. See Commonwealth v. Szuchon, 534 Pa. 483, 486, 633 A.2d 1098, 1099 (1993) (citing Commonwealth v. Lawson, 519 Pa. 504, 549 A.2d 107 (1988)). This standard is met if the petitioner can demonstrate either: (1) that the proceedings resulting in the petitioner’s conviction were so unfair that a miscarriage of justice occurred which no civilized society can tolerate; or (2) that the petitioner is innocent of the crimes charged. See Commonwealth v. Szuchon, 534 Pa. 483, 487, 633 A.2d 1098, 1100 (1993).
When the disposition granting a petition reinstates a defendant’s direct appeal rights nunc pro tunc, the judge must advise the defendant by certified mail, return receipt requested that a new notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the order.
The clerk of courts must comply with the notice and docketing requirements of Rule 114 with regard to any orders entered pursuant to this rule.
For the requirements for appointment of counsel on second and subsequent petitions, see Rule 904(B).
Relief may be granted without a hearing under paragraph (2) only after an answer has been filed either voluntarily or pursuant to court order.
A PCRA petition may not be dismissed due to delay in filing except after a hearing on a motion to dismiss. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(b) and Rule 908.
Nothing in this rule is intended to preclude a judicial district from utilizing the United States Postal Service’s return receipt electronic option, or any similar service that electronically provides a return receipt, when using certified mail, return receipt requested.
Official Note
Previous Rule 1507 adopted January 24, 1968, effective August 1, 1968; rescinded December 11, 1981, effective June 27, 1982; rescission vacated June 4, 1982; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; rescinded February 1, 1989, effective July 1, 1989, and not replaced. Present Rule 1507 adopted February 1, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended August 11, 1997, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 907 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised September 18, 2008, effective February 1, 2009; amended July 27, 2012, effective September 1, 2012.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the August 11, 1997 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 27 Pa.B. 4305 (August 23, 1997).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Final Report explaining the September 18, 2008 revision of the Comment concerning the United States Postal Service’s return receipt electronic option published with the Court’s Order at 38 Pa.B. 5428 (October 4, 2008).
Final Report explaining the July 27, 2012 amendments to paragraph (4) and the addition of paragraph (5) concerning orders and the proposed revision of the Comment concerning appeals nunc pro tunc published with the Court’s Order at 42 Pa.B. 5349 (August 18, 2012).
The provisions of this Rule 907 amended September 18, 2008, effective February 1, 2009, 38 Pa.B. 5425; amended July 27, 2012, effective September 1, 2012, 42 Pa.B. 5347. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (311428) and (338923).