Opinion
528 EDA 2020 529 EDA 2020 530 EDA 2020 531 EDA 2020 532 EDA 2020 533 EDA 2020 534 EDA 2020 J-S21026-21
10-13-2021
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. ROLAND BROWN Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered January 8, 2020 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51- CR-0013828-2014, CP-51- CR-0013829-2014, CP-51- CR-0013830-2014, CP-51- CR-0013831-2014, CP-51- CR-0013834-2014, CP-51- CR-0013836-2014, CP-51- CR-0013837-2014
BEFORE: BOWES, J., OLSON, J., and COLINS, J. [*]
MEMORANDUM
OLSON, J.
Appellant, Roland Brown, appeals from an order entered on January 8, 2020, in the Criminal Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County that dismissed, without a hearing, his petition filed pursuant to the Post-Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We affirm.
The PCRA court summarized the factual history as follows:
[Over several weeks in August and September 2012, Appellant and his paramour, Mary Jeffries, engaged in a spree of violent robberies in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Following a two-day bench trial, the court found Appellant guilty of nine counts of simple assault; seven counts of possessing an instrument of crime; six counts of robbery; five counts each of criminal conspiracy to commit robbery, theft by unlawful taking, and theft by receiving stolen property; three counts each of recklessly endangering another person and terroristic threats; two counts of using an incapacitation device; and, one count each of robbery of a motor vehicle, aggravated assault, and criminal conspiracy to commit simple assault.]
At trial, all of the victims testified that [A]ppellant robbed and, on most occasions, assaulted them[.] Appellant's victims also testified that he was accompanied and assisted by a woman during [these episodes]. Commonwealth witness, Mary Jeffries, testified that she was the woman that accompanied [A]ppellant on all of these occasions and provided testimony as to both her and [A]ppellant's criminal involvement in the robberies. She further testified that she had entered into an open guilty plea arrangement for the role she played in the robberies.
On April 22, 2016, following his conviction, [A]ppellant was sentenced [to 45-90 years' incarceration]. On May 12, 2017, [this Court affirmed Appellant's judgment of sentence]. Appellant then filed a timely [p]etition for [a]llowance of [a]ppeal with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which was denied on September 19, 2017. Appellant then filed a petition seeking a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on June 18, 2018.
On March 18, 2019, [A]ppellant filed a timely pro se PCRA petition. On May 14, 2019, [A]ppellant's court appointed counsel filed an amended petition on his behalf. [The Commonwealth filed a motion to dismiss Appellant's amended petition on August 20, 2019].
[On September 26, 2019, the PCRA court, after thoroughly reviewing the filings of the parties, the issues raised by Appellant and the law relating to this matter, and after hearing the arguments of counsel, issued a 20-day notice of its intent to dismiss the petition without a hearing pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 907. Thereafter, on January 8, 2020, the PCRA entered its order formally dismissing Appellant's amended petition].
On February 7, 2020, [A]ppellant filed a timely [n]otice of [a]ppeal, together with [a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b).PCRA Court Opinion, 1/15/21, at 1-2.
Because Appellant included a notice of appeal at each PCRA court docket affected by the order dismissing his petition, his notice of appeal is compliant with our Supreme Court's mandate in Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969 (Pa. 2018).
Appellant's brief raises the following questions for our review.
Whether the PCRA court erred by dismissing the PCRA petition when clear and convincing evidence was presented that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to meet with [Appellant] prior to
trial and prepare an appropriate defense; failing to request all compulsory discovery information regarding agreements between a witness and the Commonwealth; failing to impeach the credibility of a witness based on crimen falsi conviction; improperly cross-examining the Commonwealth witnesses; and failing to file pretrial motions to dismiss or suppress evidence[?]
Whether the PCRA court erred by dismissing the PCRA petition when clear and convincing evidence was presented to establish a violation of [A]ppellant's constitutional right to due process based on the prosecution's willful or inadvertent withholding of exculpatory or impeachment evidence, as well as by a conviction based upon evidence that did not prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt[?]
Whether the PCRA court erred by failing to grant an evidentiary hearing[?] Appellant's Brief at 8.
We have carefully reviewed the certified record, the submissions of the parties, and the Rule 1925(a) opinion issued by the PCRA court. Based upon our review, we conclude that the PCRA court has adequately and accurately examined the claims raised in this appeal and that Appellant is not entitled to relief for the reasons expressed in the PCRA court's opinion. Accordingly, we adopt the PCRA court's opinion, as amended below, as our own. The parties are directed to attach a copy of the PCRA court's opinion to all future filings pertaining to the disposition of this appeal.
We add only that the PCRA court did not abuse its discretion in denying the instant petition without convening an evidentiary hearing. SeeCommonwealth v. Hand, 252 A.3d 1159, 1165 (Pa. Super. 2021) (PCRA court may exercise its discretion and decline to conduct a hearing where collateral claims lack merit and enjoy no record support).
Order affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
[*] Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.