IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Michael Naylor, :

Petitioner :

 :

v. : No. 557 C.D. 2015

 : SUBMITTED: September 25, 2015

Pennsylvania Board of Probation :

and Parole, :

Respondent :

BEFORE: HONORABLE BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER, Judge1

HONORABLE ROBERT SIMPSON, Judge

HONORABLE JAMES GARDNER COLINS, Senior Judge

OPINION NOT REPORTED

MEMORANDUM OPINION BY

JUDGE LEADBETTER FILED: February 9, 2016

Petitioner, Michael Naylor, petitions for review of the order of the 

Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (Board) denying Petitioner’s petition 

for administrative review of the most recent change to his parole violation 

maximum sentence date. Additionally, Petitioner’s counsel, Tina M. Fryling, 

Esquire, petitions for leave to withdraw her representation, asserting that 

Petitioner’s appeal is meritless. For reasons set forth below, we deny Attorney 

Fryling’s petition to withdraw her appearance as counsel.

 

1

This case was assigned to the opinion writer on or before January 31, 2016, when Judge 

Leadbetter assumed the status of senior judge.
2

Suffice it to say that, by notice mailed on February 13, 2015, which 

referenced a Board decision recorded on February 2, 2015, the Board informed 

Petitioner of his “recommit[ment] to a state correctional institution as a technical 

parole violator to serve 6 months, and as a convicted parole violator to serve 6 

months, concurrently, for a total of 6 months [backtime].” Certified Record, Notice 

of Board Decision, mailed February 13, 2015, at 1. Petitioner’s new parole 

violation maximum date was listed as August 14, 2018. Petitioner, representing 

himself, promptly filed a request for administrative review with the Board, arguing 

the Board miscalculated his parole violation maximum date and requesting the 

Board to re-issue an official action providing for a parole violation maximum date 

of September 23, 2016. The Board denied Petitioner’s review request, determining 

that the August 14, 2018, parole violation maximum date was correct.

Attorney Fryling filed a petition for review with this Court on 

Petitioner’s behalf, asserting the Board’s imposition of an incorrect parole 

violation maximum date. She also filed a petition for leave to withdraw as counsel 

and a Turner letter2in support thereof. Pursuant to Turner, counsel aiming to 

withdraw from the representation of a petitioner who seeks review of a Board 

determination must proffer a “no-merit” letter detailing the nature and extent of 

counsel’s review and listing the discrete issues that the petitioner wishes to raise, 

with counsel’s reasons why those issue lack merit. Zerby v. Shanon, 964 A.2d 956, 

961 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (relying on Turner, 544 A.2d at 928). If counsel fails to 

satisfy the technical requisites of a no-merit letter, this Court will deny the 

attorney’s request to withdraw representation, and we will direct counsel either to 

file a new request with supporting documents complying with the technical 

 

2 Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988).
3

requisites of a no-merit letter or a brief advocating on the petitioner’s behalf. 

Seilhamer v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 996 A.2d 40, 43-44 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010); 

Zerby, 964 A.2d at 960.

Here, while Attorney Fryling correctly notes in her Turner letter that 

Petitioner objects to the recalculation of his parole violation maximum date, she 

incorrectly states his maximum date as being September 23, 2016, which is 

apparently the previous maximum date that Petitioner wants reinstated. Again, 

Petitioner in his request for administrative review to the Board dated February 22, 

2015, objected to the calculation of his parole violation maximum date as August 

14, 2018. Although Attorney Fryling argues that “[t]he Board’s parole violation 

maximum sentence date was calculated correctly,” Turner letter at 3, counsel’s 

lack of knowledge regarding Petitioner’s actual parole violation maximum date is 

clearly fatal to her withdrawal petition. This Court will not conduct an independent 

examination of the merits of Petitioner’s review petition until we are satisfied that 

counsel has fully met her obligations pursuant to Turner. 

 

 

`

_____________________________________

BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER,

Judge
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Michael Naylor, :

Petitioner :

 :

v. : No. 557 C.D. 2015

 :

Pennsylvania Board of Probation :

and Parole, :

Respondent :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 9th day of February, 2016, Tina M. Fryling’s 

petition to withdraw as counsel is denied, without prejudice. Counsel is directed to 

refile her petition to withdraw or file a brief in support of Michael Naylor’s 

petition for review within thirty (30) days of this order. 

_____________________________________

BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER,

Judge