J-S54035-20

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

TERRELL DEBARGE GABLE 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 342 MDA 2020

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 4, 2018

In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Criminal Division at No(s): 

CP-67-CR-0000292-2016

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

TERRELL DEBARGE GABLE 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 343 MDA 2020

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 4, 2018

In the Court of Common Pleas of York County Criminal Division at No(s): 

CP-67-CR-0000293-2016

BEFORE: NICHOLS, J., McLAUGHLIN, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

MEMORANDUM BY MUSMANNO, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 19, 2021

Terrell Debarge Gable (“Gable”) appeals from the judgments of sentence 

imposed following his convictions, at docket number CP-67-CR-0000292-2016 

(“Docket No. 292-2016”), of indecent assault person less than 13 years of age 

and corruption of minors,

1 and at docket number CP-67-CR-0000293-2016 

____________________________________________

1 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3126(a)(7), 6301(a)(1)(i).
J-S54035-20

- 2 -

(“Docket No. 293-2016”), of corruption of minors and involuntary deviate 

sexual intercourse – less than 13 years of age.

2

 We affirm.

The trial court previously summarized the factual and procedural history 

of these cases as follows:

On or about October 15, 2015, [Gable] was charged at 

Docket No. 293-2016 with [rape of a child and related offenses.] 

On or about November 24, 2015, [Gable] was charged at 

Docket No. 292-2016 with [indecent assault person less than 13 

years of age and related offenses.] 

On February 9, 2016, the Commonwealth filed a [N]otice of 

consolidation for [Docket Nos.] 292-2016, and 293-2016. The 

facts giving rise to all charged were adduced at trial as follows.

E.R.’s Disclosure (Docket No. 292-2016)

On or about June 13, 2014, Detective Kyle Hower 

[(“Detective Hower”)] of the York City Police Department 

commenced an investigation of a sexual assault allegedly 

committed by [Gable] in the spring of 2014 against E.R., [Gable’s] 

then three-year-old biological niece. E.R.’s mother became 

concerned when E.R. instructed her mother, as she dressed E.R. 

for school, not to “lick her cat.” When asked if anyone had ever 

licked E.R[.]’s “cat,” E.R. revealed that one evening when [Gable] 

and E.R. were alone in E.R.’s kitchen in her home[,] located at 

400 E. Princess St. in York City, [Gable] directed E.R. to climb 

onto the kitchen table. E.R. complied. Once at the table, as E.R. 

lay on her back, [Gable] removed her pants and pull-up 

underwear and placed his bare penis on the outside of her bare 

vagina.

T.S.L.’s Disclosure (Docket No. 293-2016)

On or about September 29, 2015, Detective [] Hower ... 

commenced an investigation of a sexual assault allegedly 

committed by [Gable] between the end of 2011 and the spring of 

____________________________________________

2 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3123(b).
J-S54035-20

- 3 -

2012 against T.S.L., a prepubescent girl with whom [Gable] had 

a familial relationship. Upon learning of E.R.’s allegations, T.S.L.’s 

mother routinely questioned her children about whether they had 

ever been sexually assaulted. T.S.L. disclosed that one evening, 

when T.S.L. slept at home on the living room sofa, [Gable] broke 

into T.S.L.’s home at 461 Salem Avenue through an unsecured 

kitchen window, pulled down her pajama pants and underwear, 

and anally penetrated her. T.S.L. screamed out for help in the 

hopes that her mother[,] who was sleeping in an upstairs 

bedroom[,] would hear her. [Gable] ordered T.S.L. to shut up 

while he completed the act. [T.S.L.] complied. Immediately 

following the assault, [Gable] smoked a cigarette and exited 

T.S.L.’s home.

[Gable’s first jury trial resulted in a mistrial after a 

Commonwealth witness testified that Gable had been incarcerated 

prior to the commission of the alleged crimes.]

* * *

... Following a second jury trial [from] January 16, 2018, 

through January 18, 2018, the jury unanimously convicted 

[Gable,] at Docket No. 292-2016[,] of [indecent assault person 

less than 13 years of age] and [corruption of minors,] and at 

Docket No. 293-2016[,] of [corruption of minors] and [involuntary 

deviate sexual intercourse – less than 13 years of age]. All 

remaining counts at both dockets were withdrawn. Immediately 

following the trial, [Gable’s trial counsel] filed a Petition to 

Withdraw as Counsel which was granted on January 29, 2018.

On June 4, 2018, at Docket No. 292-2016, [Gable] was 

sentenced to a term of two (2) to four (4) years of confinement in 

[prison] for [indecent assault person less than 13 years of age]

and a term of one (1) to two (2) years of confinement for 

[corruption of minors,] which runs concurrently with [indecent 

assault person less than 13 years of age].

At Docket No. 293-2016, [Gable] was sentenced to a term 

of one (1) to two (2) years of confinement in [prison] for 

[corruption of minors,] and a term of fifteen (15) to thirty (30) 

years of confinement for [involuntary deviate sexual intercourse 

– less than 13 years of age,] which runs concurrently with 

[corruption of minors], but consecutively to the sentence imposed 
J-S54035-20

- 4 -

at Docket No. 292-2016, which yields a total aggregation of 

seventeen (17) to thirty-four (34) years [in prison].

Immediately following sentencing, [Gable’s sentencing 

counsel] made an oral [M]otion for leave to withdraw as counsel 

citing her [change in] employment[. The trial court] granted [the] 

[M]otion and appointed [new counsel] to represent [Gable] at the 

post-sentence phase through direct appeal.

On June 19, 2018, [Gable,] filed a [M]otion requesting an 

extension of time within which to file a [p]ost-[s]entence [m]otion 

which [the trial court] granted on June 21, 2018. [Gable] did not 

file a [p]ost-[s]entence [m]otion[,] and on July 3, 2018, filed a 

[single] timely [N]otice of [A]ppeal to the Superior Court.

Trial Court Opinion, 10/2/18, at 2-7.

This Court quashed Gable’s appeal for failure to comply with our 

Supreme Court’s decision in Walker.

3

 See Commonwealth v. Gable, 217 

A.3d 402 (Pa. Super. 2019) (unpublished memorandum at 1-3).

The trial court appointed Gable new counsel, and on January 23, 2020, 

Gable filed a Petition for relief pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act

(“PCRA”).

4

 In his PCRA Petition, Gable alleged that his direct appeal counsel 

had rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to file separate

Notices of Appeal at each docket number, in compliance with the mandates in 

____________________________________________

3 Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969, 977 (Pa. 2018) (stating that 

“when a single order resolves issues arising on more than one lower court 

docket, separate notices of appeal must be filed [and t]he failure to do so will 

result in quashal of the appeal.”) (citing Pa.R.A.P. 341).

4 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546.
J-S54035-20

- 5 -

Walker. On January 28, 2020, the PCRA court reinstated Gable’s direct 

appeal rights, nunc pro tunc.

On February 20, 2020, Gable filed two nunc pro tunc Notices of Appeal, 

one at each docket number. Gable filed a court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) 

Concise Statement of errors complained of on appeal.

On June 9, 2020, Gable filed a Motion to consolidate appeals. On June 

10, 2020, this Court granted Gable’s Motion and consolidated his appeals.

Gable now presents the following issue for our review: “Whether the 

[t]rial [c]ourt erred when it consolidated [] Gable’s trial for the crimes 

docketed as [Docket No. 292-2016] and [Docket No. 293-2016,] despite the 

lack of similarities between the two offenses[?]” Brief for Appellant at 4.

Gable contends that the trial court erred when it consolidated his cases 

for trial “despite the lack of similarities between the two[.]” Id. at 13. Gable 

argues that there are “significant differences” between the two incidents. Id.

at 13. Specifically, Gable asserts that E.R.’s and T.S.L.’s respective 

testimonies demonstrate differences in victim age, locations of the assaults, 

and Gable’s relationship to the victims. Id. at 13-15. Gable claims that the 

only similarity between the testimonies is that they both allege the sexual 

assault of a child. Id. at 15-19.

At the outset, we must determine whether Gable has properly preserved 

this claim for our review. On February 9, 2016, the Commonwealth properly 

filed its Notice of Consolidation for Docket No. 292-2016 and Docket No. 293-
J-S54035-20

- 6 -

2016 pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 582(B)(1). The comment to Rule 583, 

pertaining to severance of informations, provides that “any request for 

severance must ordinarily be made in the omnibus pretrial motion or it is 

considered waived[.]” Pa.R.Crim.P. 583 cmt.; see also Pa.R.Crim.P. 578 cmt. 

(listing motions for severance as appropriate types of pretrial relief for the 

omnibus pretrial motion). 

Instantly, Gable did not object to the joinder of Docket No. 292-2016 

and Docket No. 293-2016, nor did he file a motion to sever. In fact, the first 

time that Gable raised this issue was in his Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Concise 

Statement. The “failure to make a timely and specific objection before the 

trial court at the appropriate stage of the proceedings will result in waiver of 

the issue.” Commowealth v. Houck, 102 A.3d 443, 451 (Pa. Super. 2014); 

see Pa.R.A.P. 302(a) (providing that “[i]ssues not raised in the trial court are 

waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.”). Accordingly, 

Gable’s claim is waived.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 02/19/2021