J-S34006-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

IN THE INTEREST OF: D.D., A MINOR IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

APPEAL OF: D.D., A MINOR

No. 1766 MDA 2015

Appeal from the Dispositional Order June 17, 2015

In the Court of Common Pleas of York County

Juvenile Division at No(s): CP-67-JV-0000429-2015

BEFORE: PANELLA, J., STABILE, J., and JENKINS, J. 

MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, J. FILED JULY 25, 2016

D.D., a juvenile, appeals from the dispositional order entered after he 

was adjudicated delinquent on charges of robbery, simple assault, theft by 

unlawful taking, intimidation of a witness, criminal conspiracy to intimidate a 

witness, and conspiracy to commit robbery.1 Additionally, Appellant’s courtappointed counsel, Kevin Hoffman, Esquire, has filed an application to 

withdraw as counsel pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 

(1967), and Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009). After 

____________________________________________

1 D.D. purports to appeal from the denial of his motion for post-disposition 

relief by operation of law on September 11, 2015. The proper final, 

appealable order in juvenile delinquency matters is the dispositional order. 

We have corrected the caption accordingly.
J-S34006-16

- 2 -

careful review, we affirm Appellant’s judgment of sentence and grant 

counsel’s application to withdraw.

D.D. was adjudicated delinquent on May 6, 2015, and the juvenile

court placed D.D. at a secure residential treatment facility by dispositional 

order entered June 17, 2015. D.D. filed a timely post-disposition motion for 

reconsideration, in which he challenged the weight of the evidence 

supporting the adjudication of delinquency. The motion was denied by 

operation of law on September 11, 2015. This timely appeal followed.

As noted, Attorney Hoffman has requested to withdraw and has 

submitted an Anders brief in support thereof contending that Appellant’s 

appeal is frivolous. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has articulated the 

procedure to be followed when court-appointed counsel seeks to withdraw 

from representing an appellant on direct appeal.

[I]n the Anders brief that accompanies court-appointed 

counsel’s petition to withdraw, counsel must: (1) provide a 

summary of the procedural history and facts, with citations to 

the record; (2) refer to anything in the record that counsel 

arguably believes supports the appeal; (3) set forth counsel’s 

conclusion that the appeal is frivolous; and (4) state counsel’s 

reasons for concluding that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel 

should articulate the relevant facts of record, controlling case 

law, and/or statutes on point that have led to the conclusion that 

the appeal is frivolous. 

Santiago, 978 A.2d at 361.

We note that Attorney Hoffman has substantially complied with all of 

the requirements of Anders as articulated in Santiago. Additionally, 

Attorney Hoffman confirms that he sent a copy of the Anders brief as well 
J-S34006-16

- 3 -

as a letter explaining to Appellant that he has the right to proceed pro se or 

the right to retain new counsel. A copy of the letter is appended to Attorney 

Hoffman’s petition. See Commonwealth v. Daniels, 999 A.2d 590, 594 

(Pa. Super. 2010); Commonwealth v. Millisock, 873 A.2d 748, 749 (Pa. 

Super. 2005). D.D. did not file a response.

We now proceed to examine the issue counsel sets forth in the Anders

brief. Counsel asserts that D.D. wishes to challenge the weight of the 

evidence supporting the adjudication of delinquency. See Anders Brief at 4.

When the challenge to the weight of the evidence is predicated 

on the credibility of trial testimony, our review of the trial court’s 

decision is extremely limited. Generally, unless the evidence is 

so unreliable and/or contradictory as to make any verdict based 

thereon pure conjecture, these types of claims are not 

cognizable on appellate review. Commonwealth v. Rossetti, 

863 A.2d 1185, 1191 (Pa. Super. 2004) (citation omitted). 

“Moreover, where the trial court has ruled on the weight claim 

below, an appellate court’s role is not to consider the underlying 

question of whether the verdict is against the weight of the 

evidence.” Commonwealth v. Champney, 574 Pa. 435, 832 

A.2d 403, 408 (2003). “Rather, appellate review is limited to 

whether the trial court palpably abused its discretion in ruling on 

the weight claim.” Id.

Commonwealth v. Trippett, 932 A.2d 188, 198 (Pa. Super. 2007).

The juvenile court, in its opinion on appeal, provided the following 

reasoning for its decision.

Appellant avers that the court’s findings were against the weight 

of the evidence in that there was an eyewitness to the event 

who testified that Appellant was not involved in the criminal 

episode. The court found that E.B., the alleged victim’s 

testimony was credible based on his past experience working 

with the police. E.B. testified that the Defendant and an 

accomplice were following E.B. The Defendant and his friend told 
J-S34006-16

- 4 -

the victim they were not going to do anything except take his 

Fendi belt. Fearing for his safey, E.B. told the Defendant he had 

a knife and would use it to defend himself. Subsequently, a 

physical altercation broke out between the Defendant, his friend, 

and E.B., ending with E.B. being slammed on the ground. E.B. 

testified that when he was thrown to the ground his Blu phone, 

which was valued at approximately $250.00, fell out of his 

sweatshirt pocket. Furthermore, E.B. testified that the Defendant 

and his accomplice took E.B.’s phone and ran away with it. E.B. 

testified that after the incident was over he ran away because he 

was fearful the Defendant or his friend would return with a gun.

This court found the testimony of S.D. credible. S.D. testified 

that two individuals, one she identified as the Defendant, were 

following E.B. and then attacked him. She testified she observed 

them grab E.B., throw him to the ground, and start stomping 

and kicking him. Officer Hartman, the investigating officer, 

testified that he interviewed E.B. two days after the incident and 

observed E.B.’s scratches and bruises along his left side.

Officer Hartman testified that he was called for a triple stabbing, 

and upon arriving at the scene, he spoke with [one of the 

victims,] D.L. D.L. told Officer Hartman that he saw the males 

follow the victim and he thought they were going to jump the 

victim. He stated the males did attack the victim and while 

[D.L.] was attempting to break it up, he was stabbed. 

Additionally, D.L. told the officer that the individuals ran away 

and he helped the victim up, who then apologized to D.L.

At the fact finding hearing, D.L. testified on behalf of the 

defendant. D.L. testified that he is friends with the defendant 

and has been friends with him for the past two years. On the day 

in question, D.L. stated that he saw the Defendant trying to run 

and asked what he was doing. He testified he noticed the victim 

was continuing to poke his friend in the back with the knife, and 

in the process of trying to break up the fight he got stabbed. He 

denied making any verbal statements to the police that testified. 

The court found D.L.’s testimony not credible and completely 

inconsistent with the other witnesses’ testimony.

Juvenile court opinion, 11/18/15, at 3-9 (footnotes omitted and text 

reorganized for clarity).
J-S34006-16

- 5 -

After reviewing the delinquency hearing transcript, we find that the 

juvenile court’s factual recitation is well supported by the record. We 

furthermore can discern no abuse of discretion in the delinquency court’s 

assessment of the credibility of the witnesses or weight of the evidence at

trial. Thus, we concur with counsel’s assessment that this issue is frivolous. 

After examining the issue contained in the Anders brief and after 

undertaking our independent review of the record, we concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

Dispositional order affirmed. Permission to withdraw as counsel 

granted.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 7/25/2016