J

### -S29012-17 NON-PRECEDENTIALDECISION - SEE 

### SUPERIORCOURT 

### I.O.P. 

### 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

1 IN THE SUPERIORCOURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

v. RAYNARD GRAVES Appellee



### Appellant No. 3183 EDA 2016 Appeal

### from theOrderSeptember 13, 2016 In the CourtofCommon Pleas 

### of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): 

### CP-51-CR-0810851-1994, CP-51-CR-0810861-1994, CP-51-CR-0810871-1994, CP-51-CR-0907281-1994, CP-51-CR-1000861-1994
BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., SOLANO, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.* MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, J.: 

### FILED MAY

### 08, 2017 Raynard Graves appeals 

### from the order, entered in 

### the Court of Common Pleas 

### of Philadelphia County, denying his post

### -conviction 

### writ of habeas corpus. 

### Aftercareful review, we 

### affirm. In 1995, the

### trial court sentenced Graves to an 

### aggregate

### term of 521/2 to 105 

### years' imprisonment, after two separate 

### juries convicted him of 

### multiple offenses 

### stemming from a shooting and 

### four 

### robberies.' Graves filed a 

### direct appeal to this Court, which 

### affirmed his

### judgment of sentence

* FormerJusticespecially assigned to

### the SuperiorCourt. 

### ' Graveswas convicted ofaggravated assault, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2702, 

### criminal conspiracy, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 903, possessing an 

### instrument ofcrime (PIC), 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 907, robbery, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3701, and 

### violationofthe 

### uniform firearms act (VUFA), 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6105.J

### -S29012-17

in 1997. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Graves, 698 A.2d 1345 (Pa. Super. 1997) 

### (table). In 1998, Graves filed a 

### petition for allowance of appeal, which our Supreme Court denied. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Graves, 723 A.2d 670 (Pa. 1998) 

### (table). On December 27, 2007, Graves filed a PCRA 

### petition pro se, which the PCRA 

### court dismissed as 

### untimely. This Court affirmed the dismissal on appeal. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Graves, 3331 EDA 2008 (Pa. Super. 

### 2009). On 

### August 21, 2012, Graves filed a second PCRA 

### petition pro se, which

### the PCRA

### courtalso dismissed as 

### untimely. ThisCourt 

### affirmed on appeal. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Graves, 2546 EDA 2014 (Pa. Super. 

### 2015). On June 15, 2016, Gravesfiled a 

### prose 

### petition for

### writ of habeascorpus 

### ad subjiciendum,2 in the Court of Common Pleas 

### of Philadelphia County. The Honorable Gary S. Glazer, finding Graves was not 

### entitled to 

### relief pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 

### 9541-46 ("PCRA"), 

### appropriately treated the 

### petition as a 

### writ of habeas corpus. 

### See 

### Commonwealthv. 

### Turner, 80 A.3d 754 (Pa. 2013) 

### (writ of habeas corpus continues to 

### exist only in cases in which 

### there is no 

### remedy under the PCRA). Following review of the pleadings and record, Judge Glazer dismissed 

### the

### writ of habeascorpus.

2 This 

### type of

### writ inquiries into 

### "the lawfulness of the restrain of a person who is imprisoned or detained in 

### another's 

### custody." "Habeas Corpus Ad 

### Subjiciendum." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 24 April 2017. 

### <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/habeas corpus ad

### subjiciendum>. 

## -2J

### -S29012-17

On 

### September 30, 2016, Graves filed a 

### timely appeal in which he raises the following issue: 

### "Whether the 

### trial court abused its 

### discretion in dismissing 

### appellant's 

### [p]etition for 

### [w]rit of 

### [h]abeas [c]orpus since he is confined absent a 

### [s]entencing 

### [o]rder required by 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 9764(a)(8)."3 Brief of Appellant, at 3. Specifically, Graves claims 

### that a 

### "certified record 

## - docketing 

### entries and his sentencing 

### transcript 

## - cannot be used in his case to comprise an 

### 'existent record' 

### that authorizes his 

### incarceration." 

### Id. at 9. Graves'claim is

### of no avail. We agree 

### with the

### trial court

### that a 

### petition for 

### writ of habeas corpus, 

### rather than a PCRA 

### petition, is 

### the proper vehicle for Graves' illegal 

### detention claim. However, "section 9764 

### neither expressly vests, nor implies 

### the 

### vestiture, in a 

### prisoner of any 

### remedy 

### for deviation from the procedures prescribed 

### within." 

### Id. at 371. In 

### Joseph v. 

### Glunt, 96 A.3d 365 (Pa. Super. 

### 2014),the defendant, like Graves, filed a 

### petition for

### writof

3 Section 9764states in 

### relevant part: 

### (a) General 

### rule.--Upon 

### commitment of an 

### inmate to the custody of the 

### Department of Corrections, the 

### sheriff or 

### transporting official shall 

### provide to the 

### institution's records 

### officeror

### dutyofficer

. . . thefollowing 

### information: * * * (8) A copy of the sentencing 

### order and any 

### detainers filed 

### againstthe inmatewhichthe 

### county has notice. 42 Pa.C.S. §

### 9764(a)(8). 

## -3J

### -S29012-17

habeas corpus in which he argued his 

### currentsentence was illegal, 

### pursuant to section 

### 9764, because the Pennsylvania 

### Department of Corrections ("DOC") did not possess a

### written copy 

### of his sentencing order. In

### Joseph, this Court found 

### "none of the provisions in section 9764 indicate an 

### affirmative obligation on the 

### part of the DOC to 

### maintain and produce the documents enumerated in subsection 

### 9764(a) upon 

### the request of the incarcerated 

### person." 

### Id. at 371. Moreover, the lower 

### court determined 

### that "theexistent record 

### authorized 

### [the defendant's] incarceration."

### Id. at 368. On appeal, ourCourt held 

### that: The 

### trial court properly reviewed the record and discovered a valid sentencing 

### order contained 

### therein. 

### Moreover, 

### the

### trial court correctly concluded 

### that, even in 

### the absence 

### of a 

### written sentencing order, 

### the DOC 

### had 

### continuing 

### authoritytodetain 

### [thedefendant]. We 

### discern no 

### abuse 

### ofdiscretion in

### the

## trialcourt'sconclusion. 

### Id. at 372 (emphasis added). Moreover, 

### Joseph makes it clear 

### that Graves' 

### argument 

### that the certified record is 

### insufficient to 

### confirm the legitimacy of his sentence is 

### meritless. 

### Id. at 372 

### (criminal docket provided by

### trial court and 

### transcript ofsentencing hearing are 

### sufficientto 

### confirm imposition, and 

### legitimacy, of prisoner'ssentence). The

### trial court properly reviewed the record and found Judge Glazer entered a valid sentence on June 30, 1995. 

### Accordingly, the 

### trial court properlydismissed Graves'

### petition. Order

### affirmed.


## -4J

### -S29012-17

Judgment Entered.

J ._,eph D. 

### Seletyn, Es

. 

### Prothonotary
Date: 

### 5/8/2017



## -5