J

- S13032

- 19

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee

v. JUSTIN RAY MILLER, Appellant : : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

No. 1220 WDA 2018 Appeal from the Order Entered August 7 , 2018 i n the Court of Common Pl eas of Fayette County Criminal Division at No(s): CP

- 26

- CR

- 0000619

- 2012 BEFORE: BENDER , P.J. E. , OTT , J. and STRASSBURGER, J. * JUDGMENT ORDER BY STRAS S BURGER, J. : FILED APRIL 26, 2019 Justin Ray Miller (Appellant) pro se appeals from the August 7, 2018 order, which notified Appellant the court intended t o dismiss his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction R elief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541

- 9546. Because the notice appealed from was not a final order, we quash the appeal

. We glean the following facts from the record. In 2012, Appe llant was charged with one count each of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance ; possession of a controlled substance; and use or possession of drug paraphernalia. On February 4, 2013, Appellant entered a negotiated guilty plea to the af orementioned charges. O n March 25, 2013, Appellant was sentenced to three to six years of incarceration on the possession with intent to deliver conviction

. N o further penalty was imposed on the remaining
counts

. Appellant did not file a post

- sentence motion or direct appeal.J

- S13032

- 19

- 2

-

Appellant filed two PCRA petitions, both of which resulted in dismissal by the PCRA court and were not appealed

. On June 6, 2018, Appellant filed pro se the instant PCRA petition , his third

. On August 7, 2018, th e PCRA court issued notice of its intent to dismiss Appellant’s petition without a hearing pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 907. Appellant responded on August 10, 2018 , by filing a request for copies of his prior two PCRA petitions, but he did not otherwise address the PCRA court’s notice of intent to dismiss. On August 22, 2018, Appellant filed the instant appeal. As an initial matter , we must consider whether we have jurisdiction. The PCRA court has not entered a final order dismissing Appellant’s third PCRA petition. 1 As noted supra , Appellant filed pro se a notice of appeal from the PCRA court’s notice of intent to dismiss

. Generally, an appeal may be taken only from a final order of court. See Pa.R.A.P. 341 (relating to final orders). Because the n otice appealed from is not a final order , Appellant’s appeal is premature

. See id .; Pa.R.Crim.P. 910 (“An order granting, denying, dismissing, or otherwise finally disposing of a petition for post

- conviction

_________________ __________ ______ ____ _______ 1 T he PCRA cou rt appears to be aware of this, as i t indicated in its statement in lieu of opinion pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925 that the August 7, 2018 order was not “a final disposition subject to appeal.” Statement in Lieu of Opinion, 10/25/2018 at 1 (unnumbered). This Court may address a premature appeal when the subsequent actions of the PCRA court fully ripen it. See Pa.R.A.P. 905 (“A notice of appeal filed after the announcement of a determination but before the entry of an appealable order shall be treated as filed after such entry and on the day ther eof.”). Here, the PCRA court took no further action in this case, leaving the PCRA matter still pending.J

- S13032

- 19

- 3

-

collateral relief shall constitute a final order for purposes of appeal) (emphasis added). Accordingly, we quash the appeal. Appeal quashed. Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 4/26/2019