Opinion
J-S79040-17 No. 1103 EDA 2017
12-19-2017
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. METTA M. WOODRUFF Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the PCRA Order March 27, 2017
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-1000821-2005 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., LAZARUS, J., and OTT, J. MEMORANDUM BY GANTMAN, P.J.:
Appellant, Metta M. Woodruff, appeals from the order entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, which denied her first petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act ("PCRA"). We affirm.
42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546.
In its opinion, the PCRA court accurately set forth the relevant facts and procedural history of this case. Therefore, we have no reason to restate them.
Appellant raises one issue for our review:
WAS COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO RAISE THE ISSUE OF APPELLANT'S BEING SUBJECT TO AN ILLEGAL MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCE?(Appellant's Brief at 8).
After a thorough review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and the well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable Genece E. Brinkley, we conclude Appellant's issue on appeal merits no relief. The PCRA court opinion comprehensively discusses and properly disposes of the question presented. ( See PCRA Court Opinion, filed May 17, 2017, at 3-7) (finding: neither Pennsylvania Supreme Court nor United States Supreme Court has declared Alleyne retroactive to cases in which defendant's judgment of sentence was already final before Alleyne decision; at time of Appellant's sentencing, Pennsylvania law provided that mandatory minimum sentencing statutes did not violate Apprendi , so long as mandatory minimum sentence did not increase overall penalty for crime beyond statutory maximum; United States Supreme Court decided Alleyne on June 17, 2013, after Appellant's judgment of sentence was final; if counsel had made Apprendi challenge at time of Appellant's sentencing, it would have merited no relief; because Appellant's judgment of sentence was already final when Supreme Court announced Alleyne , Appellant is not entitled to retroactive application of that decision). Accordingly, we affirm based on the PCRA court's opinion.
Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. 99, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013).
Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).
The trial court sentenced Appellant to a mandatory minimum five years' imprisonment for her aggravated assault conviction, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9712 (sentences for crimes of violence committed with firearms). The overall sentence did not exceed the statutory maximum. See 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2702(b) (grading aggravated assault conviction under subsection (a)(1) as first-degree felony); 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 1103(1) (fixing statutory maximum for first-degree felony at 20 years).
This case is distinguishable from Commonwealth v. Melendez-Negron , 123 A.3d 1087 (Pa.Super. 2015) (holding counsel was ineffective for allowing defendant to plead guilty to offense subject to mandatory minimum sentence where Alleyne was decided prior to defendant's guilty plea and sentencing, so counsel was on notice that legality of mandatory sentencing schemes was questionable).
In its conclusion paragraph, the PCRA court states it denied relief after review of the applicable case law, testimony, and statutes. We clarify that the PCRA court did not hold an evidentiary hearing prior to denying PCRA relief in this case. --------
Order affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 12/19/2017
Image materials not available for display.