J-A25027-20

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

ELIJAH MOORER, JR. 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 1752 MDA 2019

Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered October 14, 2019

In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Criminal Division at 

No(s): CP-14-CR-0000532-2013

BEFORE: BOWES, J., OLSON, J., and KING, J.

MEMORANDUM BY OLSON, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 19, 2020

Appellant, Elijah Moorer, Jr., appeals pro se from the order entered on 

October 14, 2019, which denied his serial petition filed under the Post 

Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We dismiss this 

appeal.

This Court has previously explained:

on December 9, 2013, Appellant pled guilty to multiple counts 

of drug delivery and violations of the Uniform Firearms Act. 

On March 12, 2014, the trial court imposed 36 to 72 years of 

incarceration. On March 31, 2015, the trial court imposed 

the same term without relying on any mandatory minimums, 

thereby bringing the sentence into compliance with Alleyne 

v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013). This Court 

affirmed the judgment of sentence on March 22, 2016. 

[Commonwealth v. Moorer, 141 A.3d 591 (Pa. Super. 

2016) (unpublished memorandum) at 1-10.]

Commonwealth v. Moorer, 198 A.3d 464 (Pa. Super. 2018) (unpublished 

memorandum) at 1.
J-A25027-20

- 2 -

On February 29, 2016, Appellant filed a timely, pro se PCRA petition. 

The PCRA appointed counsel to represent Appellant during the proceedings 

and counsel filed an amended petition on Appellant’s behalf. Nevertheless, 

the PCRA court denied Appellant relief on his petition and, on September 18, 

2018, this Court affirmed the PCRA court’s order. Id. at 1-6.

Following our September 18, 2018 memorandum opinion, Appellant 

began filing innumerable pro se petitions and amended petitions, where he 

sought relief from his judgment of sentence. The PCRA court denied 

Appellant’s requests for relief in various orders and Appellant filed a notice of 

appeal.

Appellant’s brief to this Court is approximately 240 pages long and 

exceeds 50,000 words. This is in flagrant violation of Pennsylvania Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 2135, which mandates that “[a] principal brief shall not

exceed 14,000 words.” Pa.R.A.P. 2135(a)(1) (emphasis added). Appellant 

has also violated our Rules of Appellate Procedure, in that: Appellant's brief 

does not contain “a certificate of compliance with the word count limit,” as 

required by Rule 2135(a)(1) and (d); Appellant failed to attach the relevant 

trial court opinions to his brief, as required by Rule 2111(a)(10) and (b); and, 

Appellant has not divided his argument section “into as many parts as there 

are questions to be argued,” as required by Rule 2119(a). We further note 

that Appellant’s statement of questions involved lists 131 separate legal 

issues.
J-A25027-20

- 3 -

Considering the length of Appellant’s brief and the multitude of issues 

Appellant has attempted to include in the brief, Appellant’s failure to comply 

with our Rules of Appellate Procedure substantially impedes our ability to 

conduct meaningful appellate review of Appellant’s claims, as we are unable 

to discern the issues Appellant wishes this Court to review. As such, we 

dismiss this appeal. See Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (“[b]riefs and reproduced records 

shall conform in all material respects with the requirements of [our] rules as 

nearly as the circumstances of the particular case will admit, otherwise they 

may be suppressed, and, if the defects are in the brief or reproduced record 

of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal or other matter may be 

quashed or dismissed.”); see also Commonwealth v. Postie, 110 A.3d 

1034, 1041 n.8 (Pa. Super. 2015) (“[a]lthough this Court is willing to construe 

liberally materials filed by a pro se litigant, pro se status generally confers no 

special benefit upon an appellant. Accordingly, a pro se litigant must comply 

with the procedural rules set forth in the Pennsylvania Rules of the Court”).

Commonwealth’s application to quash appeal denied. Appeal dismissed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 11/19/2020
J-A25027-20

- 4 -