J-S69007-16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

Appellee

v.

JORGE PRADO

Appellant No. 2162 MDA 2015

Appeal from the PCRA Order November 5, 2015

In the Court of Common Pleas of York County

Criminal Division at Nos: CP-67-CR-0006485-2012; and CP-67-CR0002643-2014

BEFORE: STABILE, DUBOW, and PLATT, *JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 22, 2016

Appellant, Jorge Prado, appeals from the November 5, 2015 order of 

the Court of Common Pleas of York County (“PCRA court”), denying relief 

under the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-46. 

Appellate counsel has filed an Anders1 brief and requested permission to 

withdraw. Upon review, we quash the appeal, and dismiss counsel’s petition 

to withdraw.

Stemming from an incident on August 20, 2012, Appellant pled guilty 

to driving under the influence (“DUI”)2on December 7, 2012, in docket CP-

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

1 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 

2 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(b).
J-S69007-16

- 2 -

67-CR-006485-2012. Appellant was sentenced to five years of intermediate 

punishment with the first 45 days at the York County Prison followed by 90 

days of house arrest/electronic monitoring. As the result of an incident on 

March 23, 2014, Appellant pled guilty to DUI and driving under suspension, 

DUI related (“DUS”)3on August 18, 2014, in docket CP-67-CR-002643-

2014. As part of a negotiated sentence, Appellant was sentenced to an 

aggregate sentence of 15-63 months at a state correctional institute (“SCI”) 

on the new charges. The same date, the trial court revoked Appellant’s 

intermediate punishment sentence in CP-67-CR-006485-2012 and sentenced 

Appellant to 30-60 months at a SCI. Appellant did not file any postsentence motions or a direct appeal.

On March 31, 2015, Appellant filed a timely pro se PCRA petition 

alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Appellant was appointed PCRA 

counsel, who filed an amended PCRA petition on May 15, 2015, asserting 

trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file post-sentence motions and a 

notice of appeal. The PCRA court filed a notice of intent to dismiss on May 

22, 2015, and Appellant filed a response on June 12, 2015. A hearing was 

held on Appellant’s amended PCRA petition on November 5, 2015, at the 

conclusion of which the PCRA court denied Appellant’s petition. 

____________________________________________

3 75 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3082(c) and 1543(b)(1.1)(i), respectively.
J-S69007-16

- 3 -

Appellant filed a notice of appeal on December 10, 2015. On 

December 11, 2015, the PCRA court directed Appellant to file a concise 

statement of matters complained of on appeal. On December 28, 2015, 

Appellant filed a motion to withdraw appeal, which the PCRA court dismissed 

on January 4, 2016. On February 29, 2016, Appellant filed a concise 

statement of matters complained of on appeal. The PCRA court issued an 

opinion on March 22, 2016.

Appellant’s counsel filed, in this Court, a petition to withdraw as 

counsel and an Anders brief,4 wherein counsel raises one issue for review:

I. Whether the Appellant’s appeal contending the PCRA 

court erred by dismissing his PCRA [p]etition is 

wholly frivolous and without arguable merit within 

the meaning of Anders v. California, 368 U.S. 728 

(1967); Commonwealth v. McClendon, 434 A.2d 

1185 (Pa. 1981); and Commonwealth v. 

Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009).

Anders Brief at 6. Further, counsel’s Anders Brief addresses the merits of 

Appellant’s claim, whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file postsentence motions. 

____________________________________________

4 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), set forth the requirements to 

withdraw on direct appeal, which are more stringent than the Turner/Finley

requirements that apply on collateral appeal. See Widgins, 29 A.3d at 817 

n.2. “Because an Anders brief provides greater protection to a defendant, 

this Court may accept an Anders brief in lieu of a Turner/Finley letter.” 

Id.
J-S69007-16

- 4 -

Before we may consider these issues, we must first address whether 

counsel’s Anders brief satisfies the following requirements:

(1) provide a summary of the procedural history and 

facts, with citations to the record;

(2) refer to anything in the record counsel believes 

arguably supports the appeal;

(3) set forth counsel’s conclusion that the appeal is 

frivolous; and

(4) state counsel’s reasons for concluding that the 

appeal is frivolous. Counsel should articulate the 

relevant facts of record, controlling case law, and/or 

statutes on point that have led to the conclusion that 

the appeal is frivolous.

Santiago, 978 A.2d at 361. Furthermore, counsel must “provide a copy of 

the Anders petition and brief to appellant, advising the appellant of the right 

to retain new counsel, proceed pro se or raise any additional points worthy 

of this Court’s attention.” Commonwealth v. Flowers, 113 A.3d 1246, 

1248 (Pa. Super. 2015) (quoting Commonwealth v. Woods, 939 A.2d 

896, 898 (Pa. Super. 2007)). 

While Appellate counsel indicated the procedural history in his Anders

brief, he neglected to note that the instant appeal is untimely. Appellant’s 

PCRA petition was denied on November 5, 2015. A notice of appeal must 

“be filed within 30 days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is 

taken.” Pa.R.A.P. 903. Appellant’s final date to file a notice of appeal was 
J-S69007-16

- 5 -

December 7, 2015.5 Appellant filed a notice of appeal on December 10, 

2015; therefore, Appellant’s appeal was untimely. See Pa.R.A.P. 903. 

Accordingly, we must quash this untimely appeal.

Appeal quashed. Petition to withdraw dismissed as moot.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 11/22/2016

____________________________________________

5 The mechanical run date for Appellant to file a notice of appeal (30 days 

after November 5, 2015) was Saturday, December 5, 2015; therefore, the 

final day Appellant could file the notice was Monday, December 7, 2015.