J

- S24040

- 16

NON - PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENN SYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee

v. RAY HENRY Appellant No. 1820 MDA 2015

Appeal from the PCRA Orders September 25 and 28 , 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County Criminal Division at No(s): CP

- 38

- CR

- 0000318

- 2009;

CP

- 38

- CR

- 0001760

- 2008

BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., BOWES, J., and MUSMANNO, J. JUDGMENT ORDER BY GANTMAN, P.J.: FILED MARCH 09, 201 6 Appellant, Ray Henry, appeals from the orders entered in the Lebanon County Court of Common Pleas, which dismissed his serial petitions filed under the Post Conviction Relie f Act (“PCRA”), at 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541

- 9546. At docket no. 1760

- 2008, a jury convicted Appellant on February 6, 2009, of robbery (3 counts), conspiracy, and possessing instruments of crime. The court sentenced Appellant on March 25, 2009, to an aggregat e term of 4

- 20 years’ imprisonment. The sentence included a deadly weapon enhancement (“DWE”) per 204 Pa.Code § 303.10(a) (providing court shall consider special DWE sentencing matrix when court determines offender possessed/used deadly weapon during comm ission of offense). This Court affirmed on March 3, 2010. See Commonwealth v. Henry , 996 A.2d 544J

- S24040

- 16

- 2

-

(Pa.Super. 2010). Appellant filed a pro se PCRA petition on April 12, 2010. The court appointed counsel, who filed an amended petition on June 7, 2010. F ollowing a hearing, the court denied relief on July 19, 2010. This Court affirmed on February 23, 2011. See Commonwealth v. Henry , 24 A.3d 462 (Pa.Super. 2011). At docket no. 318

- 2009, Appellant pled guilty on May 21, 2009, to two counts of robbery. Th e court sentenced Appellant on June 24, 2009, to an aggregate term of 40 months to 10 years’ imprisonment, concurrent with the docket 1760

- 2008 sentence. The record suggests the court also imposed a DWE sentence at this docket. Appellant filed a PCRA pet ition on April 12, 2010, which he withdrew on June 7, 2010. On May 1, 2015, Appellant filed his current pro se “Motion for Modification and Correct Illegal Sentence Nunc Pro Tunc ” at both dockets. The court treated the motions as PCRA petitions, and on June 26, 2015, appointed counsel and issued notice per Pa.R.Crim.P. 907. Appellant responded on July 8, 2015. Counsel filed amended petitions on August 31, 2015. On September 25 th and 28 th , 2015, the court denied PCRA relief at docket 1760

- 2008, and at docket 318

- 2009, respectively. Appellant timely filed one notice of appeal on October 16, 2015, and a concise statement per Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) on October 26, 2015. 1

____________________________________________ 1 Ordinarily, where one or more orders resolves issues arising on more than one docket, an appellant must file separate notices of appeal from each order. See Pa.R.A.P. 341, Note . Upon inquiry from this Court, Appellant (Footnote Continued Next Page)J

- S24040

- 16

- 3

-

The timeliness of a PCRA petition is a jurisdictional requisite. Commonwealth v. Turne r , 73 A.3d 1283 (Pa.Super. 2013), appeal denied , 625 Pa. 649, 91 A.3d 162 (2014). A PCRA petition must be filed within one year of the date the underlying judgment becomes final. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(1). A judgment is deemed final at the conclusion of direct review or at the expiration of time for seeking review. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(3). The statutory exceptions to the timeliness provisions of the PCRA allow for very limited circumstances under which the late filing of a petition will be excused; a petitioner asserting a timeliness exception mu st file a petition within 60 days of the date the claim could have been presented. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(1

- 2). Instantly, Appellant’s judgment of sentence at docket 1760

- 2008 became final on April 2, 2010, upon expiration of the time to file a petit ion for allowance of appeal with our Supreme Court. See Pa.R.A.P. 1113(a). Appellant’s judgment of sentence at docket 318

- 2009 became final on July 24, 2009, upon expiration of the time to file a notice of appeal with our Superior Court. See Pa.R.A.P. 9 03(a). Appellant filed the current PCRA petitions on May 1, 2015, which is patently untimely. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(1). Appellant now attempts to invoke the “new constitutional right” exception to the statutory time bar per Section
(Footnote Co ntinued)

_______________________ filed amended notices of appeal and amended concise statements (one for each docket). Given these circumstances, we decline to penalize Appellant for his technical non

- compliance with Rule 341.J

- S24040

- 16

- 4

-

9545(b)(1)(iii), relying on Alleyne v. United States , ___ U.S. ___, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013), to declare unconstitutional the DWE provision under which Appellant was sentenced. Nevertheless, even if Alleyne created a new constitutional right, held to apply retroactively, and even if Appellant complied with the 60

- day rule, the law on which he relies affords him no relief, because the DWE provision does not implicate Alleyne

. See Commonwealth v. Buterbaugh , 91 A.3d 1247 (Pa.Super. 2014) ( en banc ), appeal den ied , ___ Pa. ___, 104 A.3d 1 (2014) (noting DWE does not implicate Alleyne ). Thus, we affirm the denial of PCRA relief. Orders affirmed. Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 3/9/2016