Case Information
*1 J-A07030-17
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 DWAYNE THOMPSON IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant
v.
KRISTA ABRAM
Appellee No. 1231 WDA 2016 Appeal from the Order Entered July 12, 2016 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Family Court at No: FD-003646-010 BEFORE: OLSON, STABILE, and STRASSBURGER, JJ. *
MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.: FILED APRIL 19, 2017
Appellant, Dwayne Thompson, appeals pro se from the July 12, 2016 order denying his motion to modify an order entered against him under the Protection From Abuse Act (“PFA”). We affirm in part, vacate in part, remand for further proceedings, and deny Appellant’s application for relief as moot. 1
The parties have been engaged in a highly contentious child custody and support dispute since July of 2008. Appellee, Krista Abram, filed for ____________________________________________
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. We are in receipt of Appellant’s April 11, 2017 application for an expedited
decision. Appellant has requested expedited action from this Court, given the fact that the final PFA order expires in August of this year. Given our decision in this memorandum, we deny the application as moot.
J-A07030-17
support from Appellant in 2008 after genetic testing revealed Appellant was the father of the parties’ child (the “Child”). The support action has been pending before Judge Kim Berkeley Clark of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, Family Division. On July 23, 2014, Appellee filed a PFA petition on behalf of herself and the Child, alleging Appellant was physically and emotionally abusive to the Child and using and selling illegal drugs in the Child’s presence. On August 12, 2014, Judge Kathryn Hens-Greco entered a three-year PFA order against Appellant prohibiting Appellant from seeing Appellee and the Child. Appellant did not file a timely appeal from the August 12, 2014 PFA order.
On September 6, 2014, Appellant filed a petition for special relief, before Judge Clark, requesting reconsideration of the final PFA order. Judge Berkeley Clark ordered Appellant to present the petition to Judge Hens- Greco. On June 3, 2015, 2 Appellant presented an emergency petition to vacate and expunge the final PFA order to Judge Hens-Greco. Judge Hens- Greco denied relief.
Presently at issue is Appellant’s June 23, 2016 petition to modify the August 12, 2014 final PFA order. Also on June 23, 2016, Appellee filed a complaint against Appellant for indirect criminal contempt (“ICC”) of a prior ____________________________________________ In the interim, Appellant filed an emergency petition to vacate and
expunge the PFA order before Judge Berkeley Clark. Judge Berkeley Clark denied relief.
- 2 -
J-A07030-17
court order. On July 12, 2016, Judge Clark denied Appellant’s motion to modify the PFA order and dismissed Appellee’s ICC complaint. The trial court denied Appellant’s petition to hold Appellee in contempt. At Appellee’s request, the trial court vacated a May 3, 2016 order which permitted Appellant to deliver a cell phone to Appellee’s attorney to facilitate phone conversations between Appellant and the Child. Appellant filed this timely appeal, raising five assertions of error:
1. Whether the trial court erred when it heard, allowed[,] and
granted [Appellee’s] pro se motion to vacate [the May 3, 2016 order] when she is represented by counsel?
2. Whether the trial court erred when it heard, allowed[,] and
granted [Appellee’s] motion to vacate [the May 3, 2016 order] when she failed to appear for presentment of the motion, violated the order and then filed a pro se motion to vacate?
3. Whether the trial court erred when it denied [Appellant’s]
motion for contempt? 4. Whether the trial court erred when it denied [Appellant’s]
petition to modify [the August 12, 2014 final PFA order]? 5. Whether the trial court erred when it once again showed clear
bias for [Appellee] and no concern for the best interest of the [Child]?
Appellant’s Brief at 6.
We begin with a review of Appellant’s fourth and fifth issues. Judge Clark reasoned that the coordinate jurisdiction rule prevented her from modifying Judge Hens-Greco’s final PFA order. Trial Court Opinion, 10/28/16, at 9-10. We disagree. The trial court relied on Commonwealth v. Charnik , 921 A.2d 1214 (Pa. Super. 2007), wherein this Court noted that
- 3 -
J-A07030-17
a trial court cannot vacate a final PFA order after the appeal period expires. Id. at 1217 n.3. The trial court also cited the well-settled principle that “judges of coordinate jurisdictions sitting in the same court and in the same case should not overrule the decisions of each other.” Trial Court Opinion, 10/29/16, (quoting Okkerse v. Howe , 556 A.2d 827 (Pa. 1989)).
We observe that the Domestic Relations Act permits the plaintiff or defendant in a PFA action to file a petition for modification at any time during the pendency of the PFA order. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6117(a). The trial court cited § 6117, but nonetheless refused to consider Appellant’s modification because she “believed that this motion should have been presented before the [sic] Judge Hens-Greco.” Trial Court Opinion, 10/28/16, at 10.
The trial court misapplied the coordinate jurisdiction rule. As is clear from the foregoing law, the propriety of Judge Hens-Greco’s final PFA order is not at issue. Appellant did not file a timely appeal from that order, and it is not subject to collateral attack absent extraordinary circumstances not applicable here. Section 6117 permits modification of a final PFA order at any time during the pendency of the order. The merits of a modification petition do not call into question the propriety of the original order, as that order is no longer subject to attack. Rather, the propriety of modification presents a new issue. Therefore, the coordinate jurisdiction rule does not bar Judge Clark from hearing Appellant’s modification petition. We vacate
- 4 -
J-A07030-17
Judge Clark’s order insofar as it denied Appellant’s modification petition and remand for a decision on the merits.
As to Appellant’s remaining issues, we deny relief for the reasons explained in Judge Clark’s October 28, 2016 opinion. We direct that a copy of that opinion be filed along with this memorandum.
Order affirmed in part and vacated in part. Application for relief denied as moot. Case remanded. Jurisdiction relinquished.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 4/19/2017
- 5 -
Circulated 04/17/2017 03:33 PM .......... -~ ·,· .. ·.· I ., iNTHE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS:OF .ALLEGI'.iENY COON.TY; "ijENN$YLVANIA I I FAMJ.l,Y RIVJS.rON DWAYNE TIIO:MPSQN,·.
Appellant,
FD: ffiMl03646-0lO· SUP.ERIOR COURT NO; 12:3J WP.A ·iow KRISTA ABRAM . .. ,. .. ·- .. . . . ' OPINJO.N Appellee.
. I :HONORABLE KIM Bf:RKELEY CLARK i ". I 0W~yng,Jbpn;t_ps(>fl,prQ St -Ap~0.1mt . W13'. .Co?-1 Street 'Wilkinsburg,:P:A t5221
I
tauten Darbouze! ·Esqµ.ir~ Counse] fot Ap~llee, Kti$~ Abram O~forcl: C.e1;1."~~r-:$u1te·43oO 301 ·crarit:Streef .. , Pittsburgh, .PA 1-521:9
OR I G:lNIA;L
... · · ... IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEA50F ALLEGHENY COUNTY; PENNSYLVANIA
EA.MIL Y DIVISION~JUVENILE:SECTION bWAYNE'THOM'PSON,
Appellant,-, SUPERJQJ,{ COURT'NO; }231 WDA.20J vs, I I- KR1$'tA ABRAM, I Appellee, I
October 28r 20"16 OPiNfON'
On July 8; .2016 Appellant~ DWayne 'Thompson,. :(hereinafter Father) ]~resented a. Motion HonerableKathryn.M, Hens-Greco on Allgµ$t !?, 2()1~ During th~ S@J~;h~~g, .AppeU~~i Krista Abram :(heteirtafte:r Mother) also presented a Petition for. Special Relief.requesting: this court 10 vacatetheorder entered on May 3;_ 2016. After .consideration:of the. motions and=the Petition to Modify Protection from Abuse. As, to Mother's.Petition for Speq1~LRelif,freQ~~tu1g tha;Uva"Qaf~ myorder-ofcourt enteredon May~; :201~~ lgranted thepetitionand vacated the May ,: Father appeals my, 'order entered on July·$, 2:')16, in, w.hi4 l d~.ni-~4 hi.s ¥,i>t;iffi· for. I. • • • •• I
~qri,t~mttt~ dismissed hisJ~e"ti'tion· ta Modffy a Proteetien from Abuse Order and granted Mother~s
Motion ~9-Y"cat~ D'.IY. Qr~kr.~t~re~ on May· ·3r .4_016.. ·~ Page
HISTOEY ohJuly 13,:2016, tt:sbo-µf4 While the appeal.lnthis case involvesmy OrderofCourt'entered be noted that this· case tnvolves. a :highly .contested and contentious cu~fqdy m~tter: that was oflgmally filed .orrMay 5~ ~()10: and :a Protection horn .Abuse Matter, :inc.hJ<{ing several P·etltions 'for Indirec] Crim.ma.I Contempt. The case hisfory:ro~y be :51,UJ}I):rn.ri.z~ as set forth.below,
t ~ July .f7, 2Q98; 'Mother filed a compl~in_f m support on behalf the child, At. :the time
that: the complaint was. filed, 'f ather w.~s residing; in Ceorgia, A(fer· gen:etti:; te~tiQ.g.
established "tha.t::b~ W~.S "the .Father of .chlld, Fa-ilier· moved to ,A..U~gheny County, Pennsylvania.
Z. On May 4; 201-0; Father.filed ·a.CQQ\"pJ~1.t1(£Qr.shi,lr1;?(i· custody of the-child; The :p~ti~wei;:~,
directeii to .. attend the Gebe.i:~ti<;i® Education. and Medlatioii P.to~ram With. ·th~· ·gq!!(qf ,reaching an agr_e¢·ment
'3-.- Or)· May l.O, '.20W,. Father filed.a petition fotspe.cfatrelief; whiih w~~ presented before.me
911,M~y 20,.1dio. On May 20!" 20.10, I ordered" ·Yis.itatj~I). for Father three times· per week forthree hours pet .visit{. pending the-entry o_f ~- :fjJJal custody order.
4. bn June .2, 2010,. Eather ·fil~d A petition to enforce: the 'custody order (entered ,Q.n ::txfgi,y ,20i.
2010), OnJurtell:,.-20:tO:.MofJ\ei: filed an emergency petitidnJor ~~i;~l.i~. ,()nJune-li, 2010~ I vacated th~: order entered on May" )o_i .2o1Q and J (.)l'd~~d ~t Father .have s:up~rv.i,se,i:l,vt~:it<1_tion, a t the 'Parental Stress Center under the :~e Families Program twice '~.W~~
:s., Mo'$.er and Ilather. attended cu~totly e4:u.~!itjon .and. mediation but did not, reach cm
agreement .A conciliation was hel4 on )\µ;gust 9, 2010 and no .agreement was reached, "Thejiiattet was :refemd.. to the Partial Custody Heanng :Officer,:µ1ur_a,: v~.~~- ;Q~ A cus_tpdyJ~~~g. was held- on -Septemoer 30,-2010 before JJe~ring Officer Laura.Valles,
H~~ring .Qffice Valles: issued .a rep<:irt" and. re<:Pmm@.4~~on enOctober' i~; zoio, Heatm,g. Officer Valles recommende.d U1aJ.M9U)~r-- have primary physical ootocly ·qfth~- ~.d: i:i:nd· that: Father. ha.V.e p·arti.al, cusl(>i;i y -of the 'child' on .a transitional schet.hile" whid:t wa~ to ultimately: resul] fu F~fu~r hi);ving. partial rust~y of the child on, ~te.m~tmg, weekends ffom Friday' at 6';0()":f:J\f 'through Sunday at 6,00 P.M. '·To_e, r~9n.tptenda~on also i~ve· · ·\(:
Mo_th¢r .m-d J:ath~.i: 'shared: 'legal ·cilst6Qy., Father•was to (:c,mpfu.te a parenting ptogtatti·, i ! ·. : . ! i - ·'
----;----,---·~---·. - ---·-' --- -!-:-- ,-· _: .t • --~ -~-· ~ Lr ~: g_ ;,,
7, On November \,.2oio, Motbex timely filed exceptions to· the hearing Officer's reporf and
'recorttmendattons. M9ther fileda briefin support.QJher:~x~eptions on.Decembetl6,;2QlQ,. Fatherfiled a brief on' February 9; 2011. · .
8'. On febr:va.ry TO,. 2011 after co~ig.er;itic;m of Mother's exeephons, Jb"e ·!:,r;je(s -and oral
argument.Ldenied the exdepti.Qns and the recommendation c>f'thl;! Hearing Officer became ~ final.order oJ eourr.
tt Stibseq_uently, F3-ther filed ,a. petition for contempt claiming. that Mother was not in.
compliance -with 'tbe· custody order, Ort, May 4; 291Z, Hearfng: Officer Valles Joµnd that .Mother was ·Il;I. contempt. court .. 'The Hearing: Officer ga:v.e· Father two· we~~~ds, of additional custody time, Mother wasordered to strk~Y comply ih Qrder to· purge. the contempt.
to. Between May of.2.QJ2.and September ¢f2Ql2, J1µmey9us; motions· and. petitions were file&
by both parties regarding ciisto.dy of the· ·dJild. Both parties 'have Q\ad,e·· :ajlega.tions of abuse :t9. the, child, .resti.ltmg· in ref~qa.j~· ~Q. the Office o1 Chlldren, x'9µ;t;h~ and Families ,(CY:f) for-investigation .. Abuse has never been substantiated,
11. Mother' failed-to: cqroply with. the, custody order, which re.$.µlted in Eathet having no
'partial custody .b(!.~e_en May of 20ti:cmd .October cfZOl:2 .. t2. On Noverrib¢r,9,,i(>i2,:Fathef ptesente.d an em~rg~cy- petition fot'sp.ecial re lie( requesting
the 1vfqtlv~r be.held in contempt of court for-failure to: comply With (;µStQ(}y 'order. The courtordered that the-.¢ustody Qr<{ei;{i;)_ remain in effect and ~o:t·th~ matter to Hearing Qf.ficer -Vall'es' for a· contempt-b.~arwg.. . .
.13. On fanuary 17, 20)~,Jje.arlng_.Officet, Va.Ue~ found th,itMQttter·was in contempt 0J.~9mt
and awarde:4.F~th~r ten additional 'Weekends ·of. cni~tQdy timewith the-child, .M<>t11~r was, ordered tc, $.tri.¢(Jy comply ·wfth the p.rovjsj_cm.of th~,ordertop.u.tge'her$el.f Qi .tb.~ contempt, 14. On <>.r.al:>Qut February 1( 2013~ Fa.tb~t filed .a motion ro. ·modify th~ custody order. The
parties were. ordered to attend .J.ll.~~tion Ori March 18; _2013. M9ther failed to pay forher share offhe mediation l.~, ~ the mediation -did not ml<~ place 'on. March 18; 20l3;. c:1.1?
scheduled. 1s. an· February $, 2013; ·Father ·p.rescitted: 'a. petition f_ot special' relief, enforcement .and
s~¢n<>IJS~ l ordered that Fath~r ~h~J1.tld. 'continue to havepartia! ~tajy as. p·revfodsly orderedendI Imposeda s.aiwtfonqt$30<?:00·m co~l feestocounsel forFather., . J .
16. "4oth~t. failed -to tOlllpi.y with <ustq<fy ord,er ofcourt and on ~pril 4! 20J3,.;F;ither
pres¢rited arn:iU.~J emergency petiti~n ·tdr $~~1 relief; entered.an ·Qr.d.~· g~vmg:"Fa$et l ' I.
--· .. -~-·-- ..... -- .. ·------1 .. -.
primary physical 0.1_st9dy- of Ule child and Mother partia.1 custody evety Weekend . from, Friday:at.6:00 until S!.ln<;i~y -at 6:00 P.M: on· arUnterj.m,b;i~J$;
17: 'On April. _1.8,, ~01'3, Mother presented an ,~w~rg~.~y motionfor special relief, l <l..ist:ni~d.
her'motion :iµld Apr1L4,'2013 otder'.:t:~IJ.la.u;wd)neffect: ... 1$:. QI) April 29, 201~, Father opJaip~(i ~- ~emporary order" for. protection f:r:9m.;abuse £.tom
Mother .. Ori,May ·6, 201~, a{ter1.~ h.~.~ing;l dismissed. the. PFA;pe!ition .. 19. A cµsfody ,~on:ciij.a#P.JJ was; on July 2; :20J~;- ·:np agreemenr was reached". .J.t.tdi_cj~l,
.concil~at;ion was scheduled for Ati~st ~ ZOl:t 20 .. QnJ uly 8, 20i3Jvf.o,:herJail~d {Q ~9.mpiy wi th the custody exch:1mge;'fue police.were.called
to enforce .the order; MPih~r wasinvolved 'in an· altercation' ~th· ~e police-and.was charg¢d. With P·ggr:ay;i!~ assault, resisting arrest, mt~kr.em;:e with custody and related charges. On Jµ_iy- 11, i'.2013, Father presented an emergency motion for. special reU~f l I J .interim primary phf$kaJ ~todye and ordered" ·that Moth~ ;hc;1ve corttinQ~d. fa.thels supervised. partial custody--fWke per :w~t M~ther.-~bsecjtiently- pleaded. gtJflty, to· the ·dl,n·g~s, . · ·
zi. 'On December 13r 20t:3r <;1.{t~r-~ two-day cusmdy.·ttial, ~W¥~fod .Mother.and .. Father shared
legal -cusfody -o{ tlJg d,.iid and nearly- shared physlc_~i. Mt9<iy of fhe, dliltl~ with .M9theJ ·hav·mg: slightly more custodia L time ...
. 22, Q.n"]uly :23; 1014, Mother filed _;;i Petition for protectionFront Abuse: <:>n. ~haif of herself
and the child'. The pefition alfoge.4. fu~t Fatherwas using and s¢U.ing:~girin the.presence the .child .and. that he· was _pby.si~c:11 and" emotionally a~li$iv~· to tlw child. A temp.oraty PF A Otder'Wa& efft~~4 an~ a final' heating, Was sth~.d.uie·difor: July 30,. 2014. · · 23~ The Ju~y :30 h h~a.ring was continued.until August 1:2, l014.
24.:·0n .A,µgµ~t i, 201-4, Mother filed, a Ci).i.npl~t for indirect· Crlmlnal :C~mtempt (It<.'J
~-li~gmg .that Father had Viol.al~~ U!e ·t~mporary PFA Order, The JC¢' was scheduled.' for August H,. 2014.
25; OrtAi1gust T2,. 20J4, after a hearing, the Honorable K<J.thryn.:ftens-Greco entered a three
y.earPf A Or4~r-with;the·protected:parties ~oog.M.other and the child, Jud,geH~n.~-Cr~eo iPQ\!£4 'the IC.C hearing With: the. }FA .hearing also ruled that" 1CC ·tr~.~ founded .
. .. '!~p<>_r~cy .~s~o.dywas. awar.de4Jo M.<:>ther, wfth Judge He!JS."Gte<;Q writlng.in the Or~er ',/. i-l:> tlu!t f;ather ''inaji file. for·mgdi/ic~tio:n of.custody and :the:,ma.ijer:-$}1~µ be set before Judge 'Kun .c1ar1<;''. r · t ' · = '. · · ~ - ·~ I
. I P'a ,o·e ·o. *11 2$. Father did not file .an appeal. as tp the .PFA Orderof the ICC Order. 'Instead, Father
presented .a Petition: for Special Relief' ~foi:.e· m~ .on September 6, 20i4. Father reque·s ted reconsideration of the :et'A matter ;iv~rrfng lack credibility. of the. Witnesses: and. :thal cl.
witness did 110~ have th~. opp9r,tµnity ta testify, As.Iwas no.tthejudg_e who:pre~Jd~4 over PEA matter, I -d.~le~f the 'Peti tion for :~p.ecial Relief- ·and -ordered that ·ti,_e ;.matt~..r .by· pr:e~n·t.e((~for~ Judge Hens-Creco,
:Z?. dn.·May·14,20i5 Father: presented.an emergency moti_QI1. tovacate and .. expunge thefinal
PFA order entered· ofi August 12; 20141 byJµdg~ He.ns-O.re!cO-l,>efore this court. I -denied this motion.
28. On rune 3! 201"5., appellant presented his second emergency.motion fo vai::at:e,an·ct e)(;pqnge
the final PF.A.order before Judge Hens-Greco. The:'motiQP.W<l$'de~'ie4. 29 .. On October 9r2015;.F allier represented his Peti tion.before Judge Hens-Greco. The'Petitior,
.was denied. '30; On' December 18, :201.~, Father presented a Petition for Special Relief -, _Fc}tJ,:er requested
U.n1J h~. be· permitted to. deliver a 'Chnstmas present to his: daughter and 'have t~lephone contact with.her and to-recelve.inforrnation about.her ~d-µ.~~ti9r:t,Mother consented to this, and Ientered 'ati order s-ranffug Father's r~quE:!~J~ci relief.
31, Since December 18, '.2ff15~ hQtl) M9t:h~r Jmd: Father have presented multiple petitions ·and
motions before th~ ~Pt.J.tt. As of September i6,.201~; the case has.generatedat.leas; QO~ hundred' ,5~ty-"two .docket entries, ·
32, On May 3; :2oi6, Bather ,appe·ared before ·the· courtand presentedan E.rnerg~cy Motion
for Special 'Relief. Neither Mother nor her attorney appeared for presentation of the .motion .. Outing .his.presentation, Fatherrequested that he be· able to have telephone contact with 'his d~ught~r :c11rw,ij~ .Preyjoll$Jy ordered, Father. .requested thatI enter' .an· order. ditectirtg Mother to make arrangements to. call him evety·,mowmg· for the.child 'before sro.QQf .iIBd ev~· evening after school 1 granted Father" s motion and 9f deredthe morning and evening telephone calls 'between Father: and :hisi daughter, l also ordered Father toprovide a cell phonetoMother's.attomey, who W9Wd. then.release the cell phone to Mothedtt:otdfffo facilitak'.th¢ telephone ~on~ct,. -'
311, Qn,JIJcll~i 2$, 201~; Father presented. ~ .?y{~·aoh to Mod~ the. PFA .Ot:det:~4 a Ji.1qti<>nifor.· C~pt~mpt:. Mothet presented a- Petition' for· Special Rclie(I sct,,ed\µ~d ithea,ring on the.
rrt~tulrs for'.Jtily 8, 2016, I al~ ordered that di~ md4ectc1rim~m1J.,;orrip4inrfiled'.by Krista.
A;lbra~ a.gains~ appellant on: J~e.:2.3,. -Wi.6 tQ: be scheduled (iJposstble) on Jµly ~r-20i~.as: .; ;;. • ~ i ; - --·-··--·-------"--~ ·----~ .. i ; - ----~----·- P;a ~·e---, ..... *12 ,Arthe conclusion: of .the .hearing, .. ap~ll'"1t w~!? arrested .for the m.dii.ect criminal we.it .complaint. ·
36; On July 8i:~0.16, M9th_eJ~ pro.se, requested that Ivacate ·tne-C)rdet,e.nt~~~l on May-3, 20i6, . Whith-.g_ran_ted ,Father permission to deliver a telephone :to her; through her. att6rtU.\}l;
Mother $Q requested thatthechild not beforcedto make t~t~phc;,ne calls to FathetFath~ req~~te~ modification of .A~gtist 12, ·ioi~ f.F,A- order .and that I hold Mother in contempt for.failureto contply. Wit:h.th~:Or:4er·entered on Ma.y-3,2016,. A hearing on athe .I():: was also held, Aftet ahearing µJ opencourt, I dismissed .the ICC lalso denled ,Fa ther's ·iitotio't, for l:QJ;tf~mpt ~-J dismissed the petitj'oh fo modify Jfte pr9tec;tign. from. .abuse.ordet. I:gr~~ed'.Mo'ther's-·petitiathifid vadl;fed the ~y-;3,. 2§)1(i order ofcourt.
~7;_ Qn: Augus t8; 2016, appellant filed .a notice. Qf; ~P.P~~t of the order ,entered on July a~ :2016,,
Appellant timely-fileia,toncii>e s_t.il~Mtofm~tters complained .of:on appeal.on Al!gµ_~l ' r- 22~·20t6.
.MA TT.ERS.C'.OMPiAINED OF ON ~PEAL_. f "'th~r .raises five issues. on ·appeal. In his fus.t assignment of error, :.Father. asserts that I erred.when.I heard, allowe~,.aifd granted Mofuefs pro,se Motion to VacatEqPetitio11 for :S.~i~,
N exJ;.f~~er!,f.ates that I erred' when lheard, allowe.4.ran4gr_anteq..Motherl s_pic:He Motion to Y~c~t~ when she failed' to: appear .for the: presentation. of the motion, -violated the order, and.
then' filed a prose Motion t'oVata~, (J?e.titi9JJ· IorSpeeial.Relief)
In his: Wr.d matter .raised, Father -contends that 1 erred, when I; ~~roe4 his Motion for F.m~ly,.'.Father contends that} erted;wh~n I ~.ho.wed' deilr bias for Mother and· np con~m· I· ; ., "\- - 1 ; · for best n,itetesf.of the child .. . ---.:....-____._:...~-- r '
-----------~- - - .,.... ? __ . __ 6(P a~e, *13 . : ·.: I! ::. #
DIS.CUSSION Father asserts that' Lerred when.I fteijrci, ~J}owed, and ·granted Mother's. pro'-s~ Motipn:tp M ·Exhihlt,, language; from the Court, M.anu.~.l' :for the .A4µJ.t $ection of the Eam4y Division ,of ·the m}amiiytii'v'tsfon Cases.statesthat:
i'N.o: pro. se. motions will be ~q;ep.(~ fovolving,a:cause ofacticn 1n ·whkh ~: U.tigc\I!f 'Representation JI\ :a. parttcular cause )l~tto1rw.il.l .~· is. r:epr:es~le4. by CQ.~f d'¢f¢~rni.ned on :th~ P~$1~ of the praecipefor' appearanc.e:filed t;>y t:he· ~ttorn~y/ F.~tner also attached ro.his response/as· ExhihW' d", a <;.~p.y of. the Praecipe fot Appearance .,
. :, :· "A -defendan! has consij.tuti.oni4 right to proceed. Without" .co):msel if the decision :t~ cl~s~ :_~ :~.Q~~g· .. ~d: voluntary:'. ~~retta. v. Ctilifdrn~a( 422 JJ;'.S~ 80~, :9!~: s.c.t. 4525.,.~f.L/J::g,2d 562 (..1975)~ accord, .Commonwealth .v. D.ll1Jl~, ~ .. Pa. i74..~, A,2~f ·3.24:. (1~78). However, the. same constttuhonal ·r:igbt: 49e~ n:ot .apply to a defendant like the Appellant; ·whowas. ·r:~p~n~ t,y counselbut also wanted to be 'his own eo-counsel. Cbmmimwea.Ulh~, °£.{ff$, .. ~~- Pa: 17.6, 626. A.2d i'137 (199.3)..
This: court's. OpihiP1'. in ~IH$. ~u~rnte4. foUowin~.policf' reasons s:tate.d b}l .the Superior Court ~Qn..~~1ng: why that court will not -review ·pr-0 s.e briefs w.1:1:~-!l ~: app¢ll~l ~=r~presented .by- courisel:
.•. )· permittlhg;thep.r.o-se'brief~may mYcilYe-~·(;on.flict pe~~ iawyer and client, and tqi§,c9nllid ¢~J4d undetmj.~t;!;~ppd.i,an~'.~ cll:~c~of success; ,,;, ; t ) ,j : . ;; 'j' ; ·-----~-~-- -~--=--· ... -----· .. - 71 Pa,g e . .· : *14 .counsel.is ,qbli.g~tt;!q 'to submit to the appellate court' oill_Y'tbps~. ·i~!?lJ~~ -which he,
2.
believes to possess .merit;. ., ;3_. under no other circumstances are counsel.and dtentp!;!ntiitted. to present cipp.o!;ing ,:
arguments,. as:may well h"p~rl i( ~QQ:u~re permitted to submit Qriefs; ani · 4.- revieW:ing p.r_o _s~: .bl.'.i~fs of .counseled appellim.ts would Je~c:f tQ procedural
confusion @"~.dd~y:ir.(the:appellate proce~~becaus~ of Ure n~d-.fot tt"t~:court and -the Commonwealth to- reviewandevaluate additional pm 'ee ~rids. Ellis, Pa, at 179-1$0,.616 A.2d at .i138:-l139,.
th.is,Co.ilit.held ih-,Ellis. that a ,fof~4~tin·a criminal case.maynot' confuse and .
. ciVerburq.¢11 the ·GQ~~ b.y filing,his, own pro- se briefs.at the .same)ill'.ll;!. W,s· CQUI)~l is· filing briefs _for hint- 1a. Thereds no dgnttci lliat·.ty:pe of hyp~Jtl.:r~p:rt~ntation at . tria] or on appeal, and the- decision wh~ther. to a,Uqw .s~clthy~ri~ representation i~ within. the sowid" discretion -of the' trl~l (Q_qrt . u. {Emphaskad.ded:)
'This Court; further. ¢x:pfam.~(i ·tHis decision in Commonwetiltfr v. Roger_s~ s:37· Pa ..
581; 645· A.id 4:2-3. (1994), in which. we: held that-the Su:p.enor= Court .m~y prohibit th~ .fiiin_g pro .~e'b~iefs by appellantstepresenled.by cm~lQJ},.,.ppe~. tn.Rllgers; our decision stated that we. may :r~uite that- app~~~, remain with · counsel through the appeal. once co:tmsef h$"-fil¢4 .a b:ri~.f:be@~· to do' otherwise 'would result in the coruusionartd oveibµr~ening o(th_e,c;:gµrt'ciescribed' mEilis.
'Even ur had refused to allow to_ Mother to present: 11: prose motion, she. would still have to testify.and. be lw<!rd, In :th~ course of nearing from Father 01' his Motion had opportunity . . .
Motion, ·(;jy~ fhe testimon y offered at the hearing (as well ~, the history of this case), I would Ilkely have reached the.sameconclusion. The.reason thatI'vacatedthe.May 3 .:Wlo·on;ier W;;tS that tne~-May 3, 20Hi waiHnt~r~ because Mother failed to. comply· with the D~ 1.6>ioi's '-},_J,· . ' .. ..• : Onf~x: ·wWcli permitted, Father to ha~e tele·plloli.~ .tp_hta~ wjt}:t .bi$ -d~µghter,. receive "tnfortna ~oh
f • -; .. .. : : . : . abou t- het: ediJcation,, and delfver .a pm.#m~ g'f~ to her.T would not.have entered such an. ~wfer .. i ·: ~ ~--·-~·-· ---~-- .. 1- .• --- :·- -- ---~- !
without Mother's, corisentdue fo the. existing; I?F A.. It was dear ·the at:theJuly $; 2016' hearing, Mother Was no fongerconsentjrl-g., Accerdtngly, even.if I erred' in allo:wirtg)tfqther to proceed.pro s«, tlie erronv.~s harmless,
m .hls·~~Qnci..m~tter comp fained of oh.ap.p.eat appellant st~tes·th.at l erred when I heard, the: presentation of fhe .rholionrvi<;>.@Jgq. the order, and then filed a pro se Motion jo V~q.at~, Wheth~r ·fylqther appeared on May- ·3; f016· is' irrelevant In the' ~Qw·~ .of the presentation of
In. third 'matter complained on. -~PP~~l, f .jili,_ey contends that I erred when I denied In .. light of tltiee.y¢arJ?FA Order entered after a.hearing.Inwhich
·e:9_11~n.leg_ fqthe contact. th~ Petition alleged.abuse of the .child,. Ifeltthat] c.o.414 no] compel Motherto forte the child h>: .Pep.ti.on to-Mbd.ify Protection from Abuse Order, In-~ l~t assignment ofeiior;.Fathei: avers ~at i erred w.hen I showed elearblas fpr. _M$,. :Abram and no concem.for the.best 'interest. ()f .th~· gµl(i..
' I -Will discuss Jh.~ tw<> matters together,
-iri,: Co~monwt!alth v. Chiimi( om:Sup.erior Cpim_ hdd. !h~t.
-~
? [Pa ge'
L • • I " '·: • ,. : ~
····,·, \• "''After a final protectionorderis en tered, ~9· no motion Jo reconsider .or 'appealis: filed, thecourtno longer rehi._m~'jqri~di'c!:fon to vacate that order. Charnik~ ·92t A.-24 i2l4, atl'.Zl7, (2007).: -rh~ court does, however; .have jurisdiction to r,::lq·dify 'a -pro_tepti9n ·fron} <!J:>µ_~ .order at any· time after the· ·t.ilu)g <i a petition ·for mocii..i;k~ti.on, service of the, petition and' a hearing cm the: p.et:i.tiQ11. ,23 .Pa·.C.S, &
6U7,
it is a well-recognized principle .th~l:" ._ .. jµ~ge~ c;,f coordinate.jurisdiction sitting in.
tne. :same -totii1 and in. :th:e same .case should -not overrule the decisions, Qf :e~d, other." Okkerse. V,;}-Iqw~ r: :sn 11a-. 509, 556 A:.2d 827~ 83i f:i989),.
-~ .Pi1.,.C,$.A,. ·~108(a) provides that "thecourt r,na_y $fa,nr~y protection order or' approve any consent· agr¢ern:enHo 1:rrmg a_boQ}.~ cessation.of abuse· of the plaintiff or minor 'child. :(Emphasis -"~d¢.d.} - emer_gency motion to ·yacate and.e~@.ge the ·.(im,l P:fA order entered .on .Aii~t: 11; by JudgeHerts~Gteco; F.o_Ilowingthe-prirn;iple ofcoordinatejinisdlction; Ldenied <.1.ppell@.t'.~ motion and, directed.appellant to 'present his motion before Judge! Hens-Greco. On ji,me 3, ·2oiS, Father pr~sen ted' hrs second emeriency•tnotion Jo vacate ~.cl.: e.qn"mge theJinal PFA order. before Judge,
OnIuly :1;1~ '.201~, father presented a Petition .. to Modify Prot¢ction h:Qm Abuse. i denied -c this·'Jl;lb(i.Qn because I believed that flus motion should have ~ presented before the Judge Hens- .Greco; Additionally~ .Mcther has yeh~m~1'tly .objected .to any chatt$es in current' P:rA order.
_As,~o ·the issue of bias towards.Mother, the· record is .cJ¢.¥ ·t:h~.t.~ll decisions made m this; case werf b~ed .upon law, 'The law 4i thi~ case .favors. Mother. It Jsalso clear, ·that: I have' compasstort:for Eather, i\$'l; ~t~w~ at the conclusion of theJul}(B; 2(Jl6ihearing;:
JO:I Pa:ge *17 .. . - . ... ,:· ... - .. _
~ ... _., - ~ With tesped: fo 1ili> Thomps.Qn;$ petition to modify the prot~PIJ :_fo;,m abuse otdet,.-un.f0rlunateiy jt_~ th~ position.of this Courftihat I am ~a:ble to modlfy the PFAb:ecau$¢ Iw~s;~:wt the Judgewho presided Q.v,e:r ·tMi.h~rmg. Id1d not make th¢ d¢tenn.inc}'ij9.n;in1$ to· credibility of Witness.es and s~rfor:fu ... As much as· I feel u~~t- Mr. Thompson .should be .having: con.taC:t\\"iJh ~ daughter, there. is if PFA, :;m~ the only .contact .that:can.h~ppen; -~ wJt;h the.consent of Ms. Abrart» (See' pag~$ 66; and of the tratfstript tl\flµ(y ~;_ 2016-hearing)
CONCLUSION'
By the Court
C/OCQ,_L
-~--~-----~I·
:_l<inl Berkeley'Clark ~-- --------- ---~ ···-- ------ -- -~--- .. -· .... ------- ·- ···-· ti i r age