### J-S72007-17

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee
v. ADRIAN SIMS-EL, Appellant No. 669 EDA 2017 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered January 8, 2016 In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-23-CR-0008238-2007 BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., MUSMANNO, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E. * 

### MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, P.J.E.: FILED JANUARY 22, 2018 Appellant, Adrian Sims-El, appeals nunc pro tunc from the judgment of sentence imposed on January 8, 2016, after his previous terms of probation and parole were revoked. We affirm. Briefly, in September of 2008, Appellant pled guilty to statutory sexual assault and was sentenced in July of 2009 to a term of incarceration of 6 to 23 months, plus one year probation. He did not file a direct appeal. In August of 2009, Appellant was released on parole. Approximately one year later, in June of 2010, he was found to be in possession of child pornography, which constituted a violation of his parole/probation. Accordingly, he was arrested on June 7, 2010. In September of 2010,

_________________ ____________________ _______
* 

### Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.

### J-S72007-17

- 2 -

criminal charges were filed against Appellant in Philadelphia County. Due to the pendency of those charges, as well as other delays, Appellant’s parole/probation revocation hearing was not conducted until January of 2016, at which time his parole/probation were revoked and he was resentenced to serve a term of 393 days of ‘back time’ incarceration, plus a consecutive term of 2 to 8 years’ incarceration. Appellant did not file a timely appeal from his judgment of sentence, but ultimately sought, and was granted, leave to file a nunc pro tunc appeal. He filed a nunc pro tunc notice of appeal on February 16, 2017, and he also filed a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of errors complained of on appeal, despite not being ordered by the court to do so. The court filed a responsive opinion on June 15, 2017. Herein, Appellant presents one issue for our review: I. The revocation hearing that took place was not timely. [Appellant] was incarcerated from June 7, 2010 and the revocation did not occur until January 8, 2016. The original sentence imposed was six (6) to twenty[-]three (23) months followed by one year probation. Once [Appellant] reached the maximum, the detainer should have been lifted and the violations dismissed. Appellant’s Brief at 4 (unnecessary capitalization omitted). We have reviewed the certified record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law. Additionally, we have reviewed the thorough and wellcrafted opinion of the Honorable George A. Pagano of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County. We have also considered the “Case Timeline” created by Judge Pagano and attached to his opinion as “Exhibit A.” We

### J-S72007-17

- 3 -

conclude that Judge Pagano’s extensive, well-reasoned opinion and case timeline accurately set forth the procedural history of this case, 1 

### and correctly dispose of the issue presented by Appellant. Accordingly, we adopt Judge Pagano’s opinion and timeline as our own and affirm Appellant’s judgment of sentence on that basis. Judgment of sentence affirmed. Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 1/22/18

_________________ ____________________ _______ 1 

### Appellant seemingly takes issue with the trial court’s statement that a Gagnon I hearing was held on June 22, 2010. See Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973) (holding that due process requires a determination at a pre-revocation hearing, i.e. , a Gagnon I hearing, that probable cause exists to believe a violation has been committed). See also Appellant’s Brief at 9 (“The Commonwealth represented and the [c]ourt echoed that a Gagnon I [h]earing was held on June 22, 2010. In fact, it was not.”). While there is no transcript of the June 22, 2010 hearing contained in the certified record, the trial court’s docket demonstrates that a hearing was conducted on that date, and it was determined at that proceeding that Appellant would be held for a Gagnon II hearing. Appellant does not seem to dispute any other dates set forth in the trial court’s opinion or e timeline.Cirukted 

# 097tit 5'72 0 0 

### 7-1 

## 3,1- iLip IN

### THE COURT OF 

### COMMON PLEAS OF 

### DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 

## la CRIMINAL DIVISION

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CP-23-CR-000823&2007

vs. 

### ADRIAN SIMS-EL

Michael R. Galantino, Esquire, 

### Attorney forthe Commonwealth 

### ofPennsylvania Scott D. Galloway, Esquire, Attorney for Defendant 

## OPINION PAGANO, 

### J. Filed: 

### June 15, 

### 2017

This is aNunc 

### Pro Tune 

### Direct Appeal from the 

### Court's Judgment 

### ofSentence entered on January 8, 2016. Adrian Sims-El, 

### hereinafter "Defendant," argues that he is entitled

to 

### relief after the court found him in 

### violation 

### ofhis probation and 

### parole at the 

### conclusion 

### ofa Gagnon II Hearing, and imposed a 

### new sentence, The 

### Defendant claims 

### the Court erred by (1) holding an un-timely 

### Hearing, (2) holding a Hearing despite the 

### Defendant not having beenprovided with a written notice 

### ofhis violations, (3) failing to place in 

### writing or otherwise state the reasons for revokingprobation, (4) 

### considering during the Hearing arguments regarding the 

### Defendant's 2006 criminal charges in 

### Philadelphia County, 

### Pennsylvania, and (5) revoking the 

### Defendant's probation based on a condition 

### that had 

### not been 

### previously imposed by the court. The 

### Defendant's contentions are raeritless.

APPENDIX "A"

### FACTUAL HISTORY Part 

### of the 

### following facts are contained in the Affidavit ofProbable Cause to which the 

### Defendant stipulated when he entered his Open Guilty Plea on September 23, 2008, On November 3, 2007, Officer Charles Peterson 

### ofthe Upper Darby Township Police Department observed the Defendant and the female victim engaging in sexual intercourse inside a vehicle on a parking garage located on Heather Road and Chestnut Street, in Delaware County, Pennsylvania. After learning that the victim was fifteen (15) years 

### ofage, Officer Paterson took 

### the Defendantinto custody and transported him to the 

### Upper Darby Township Police Department. The victim was also transported to the 

### Upper Darby Township Police Department and the 

### victim's parents were notified. 

### During the interview with Officer Paterson, the victim stated that after meeting with the 

### Defendant and driving to the movie theater parking lot, the Defendant performed cunnilingus on 

### her and they 

### subsequently engaged in vaginal intercourse. The Defendant, who

was 

### interviewed afterthe victim, signed a form acknowledging that he understood his constitutional rights, and provided a signed, written statement in 

### which he admitted to having met the victim and to having engaged in sexual intercourse 

### with her in his vehicle. On 

### May 26, 2010, while the 

### Defendantwas still on 

### probation and parole, three agents from the 

### Delaware County Office 

### ofAdult Probation and Parole conducted a routine compliance check 

### of the 

### Defendant's residence in Philadelphia County. (N.T. 4/26/13 at p. 80). Since the 

### Defendant was away, the three agents were escorted to the 

### Defendant's bedroom by the 

### Defendant's father. (N.T. 4/26/13 at p. 80). 

### Upon inspection 

### ofthe 

### Defendant's bedroom, one 

### ofthe agents found two (2) 

### labeled DVDs containing pornographic material and two (2) computers 

### containing pornographic images. (N.T. 4/26/13 at pp. 85-6).

2One 

### of the agents, who had remained downstairs with the 

### Defendant's father while the 

### other agents were searching the 

### Defendant's bedroom, spoke with the Defendant immediately upon his arrival at the residence. (N.T, 4/26/13 at p. 47). The 

### agent informed the Defendant that agents 

### ofthe Delaware County Office 

### ofAdult Probation and Parole were at his residence to 

### perform a standard compliance check. (N.T. 4/26/13 at p. 47). This agent subsequently left to notify the 

### other agents 

### ofthe 

### Defendant's presence in 

### the residence. (N.T. 4/26/13 at p. 47). When the agent returned downstairs, the 

### Defendant was no longer in the residence and 

### the agent learned 

### that the Defendant had left the residence. (N.T. 4/26/13 at p. 47). 

### Followingthe search, a Bench Warrant was issued 

### on June 3, 2010, and on 

### June 7, 2010, the 

### Defendant was incarcerated. (N.T. 4/22/14 atp. 8). On 

### September 24, 2010, criminal 

### charges were filed against the Defendant on two separate criminal cases in Philadelphia County and 

### the Defendantwas arrested on those charges. 

### PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Defendant was arrested and charged in 

### Delaware County on November 3, 2007, with one (1) 

### count 

### ofStatutory Sexual Assault,' one (1) 

### count 

### ofInvoluntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse,2 one (1) count 

### ofAggravated Indecent Assault,3 one (1) count 

### ofIndecent Assault,4 one (1) count 

### ofIndecent Exposure,5 and one (1) count 

### ofEndangering the Welfare 

### Of A Child.6 On December 3, 2007, the 

### Defendantwaived 

### his right to a 

### Preliminary Hearing and agreed to 

### proceed on a Negotiated Waiver. Pursuant to the 

### Negotiated Waiver, the 

### Commonwealth 

### ofPennsylvania withdrew the charges of

### Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, 

### Aggravated Indecent Assault, Indecent Assault, 

### Indecent Exposure, and

I 18 Pa.C.S.A § 3122.1 218 Pa.C.S.A § 3123(a)(7)

3 18 Pa.C.S.A § 3125(a)(8) 4 18 Pa.C.S.A § 3 126(a)(8)

5 18 Pa.C.S.A § 3 127(a) 6 18 Pa.C.S.A § 4304(a)

3Endangering the Welfare 

### OfA Child, Magisterial District Justice Harry J. Karapalides, Esquire 

### ofthe Upper Darby District Court approved the Negotiated 

### Waiver and held the Defendant 

### for court on the sole charge 

### ofStatutory Sexual Assault, On September 23, 2008, the Defendant entered an Open Guilty Plea on 

### Information A, Statutory Sexual Assault, aFelony 

### ofthe Second Degree. The court determined that the 

### Defendant's Open Guilty Plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. The court ordered a psychosexual 

### evaluation to be performed, a drug and alcohol evaluationto be performed, the conditions 

### ofbail to remainthe same, and the release 

### ofthe 

### Defendant from Electronic Home Monitoring. On February 18, 2009, a Hearing was held in court on the 

### Defendant's Motion To 

### Withdraw The Open Guilty Plea. On March 9, 2009, the court issued an Order denying the 

### Defendant's Motion To Withdraw The Open Guilty Plea. On July 23, 2009, following the Sentencing 

### Hearing the court 

### sentencedthe Defendant as follows: on 

### Information A, Statutory Sexual Assault, Felony 

### ofthe Second degree,
to serve six (6) to 

### twenty-three (23) months, 

### ofwhich three (3) months to be served in Delaware County Prison, to 

### receive credit for time served between November 3, 2007 and December 17, 2007 for a total 

### offorty-four (44) days, the balance 

### offorty-six (46) days to be served on twentythree (23) consecutive weekends starting on July 31, 2009, the three (3) month remainder

### ofthe 

### minimum to be served on 

### Electronic Home Monitoring, serve the balance 

### ofthe paroletime,

serve one (1) 

### year consecutive probation, complete and follow 

### recommendations 

### ofDiagnostic Services, complete a 

### psychosexual evaluation, complywith general rules and regulations governing Probation and Parole. On August 9, 2009, the

### Defendant was released on parole. On August 26, 2009, the 

### court added to the 

### Defendant's sentence

### the following: to comply with Sexual Offender Rules and Regulations 

### ofProbation and Parole.

4On June 3, 2010, the court issued a Bench 

### Warrant for the 

### Defendant afterthe search conducted on the

### Defendant's residence on May 26, 2010. On June 22, 2010, after a Gagnon I Hearing, the Office 

### ofProbation and Parole determined that the 

### Defendanthad violated his 

### probation and parole, had failed to complete 

### court ordered treatments 

### orother conditions 

### ofhis sentence, and was to appear in court for a Gagnon II Hearing. On 

### November 24, 2010, a Preliminary Hearing was held in Philadelphia County, at the 

### conclusion 

### ofwhich the 

### Defendant was held for court in that county. Subsequently, a Gagnon I Hearing was held 

### in this

case 

### determining that the Defendant would appear in court 

### for a Gagnon II 

### Hearing after the disposition 

### ofhis criminal cases in Philadelphia County. On April 26, 2013, a Gagnon II Hearing was held in court, where the court took 

### the Commonwealth's and the 

### Defense's arguments under advisement and gave the parties the 

### opportunity to submitbriefs on issues raised 

### duringthe Hearing. 

### The Gagnon II 

### Hearing was concluded in court on April 22, 2014. On January 8, 2016, following the Sentencing Hearing, the court found the 

### Defendant in violation 

### ofhis probation and parole, and sentenced the Defendant as follows: the 

### Defendant's parole to be revoked and a new sentence 

### ofthree hundred and ninety-three (393) days 

### backtime to be imposed with immediate parole to be served at the Delaware County Prison, 

### the Defendant's probationto be revoked and a 

### new sentence 

### oftwo (2) 

### to eight (8) years to be imposed, the 

### new sentence to run 

### consecutive to the 

### Defendant's back time and to be served at the State Correctional Institution, 

### the Defendant is to participate in an 

### intensive sexual offender treatmentprogram while incarcerated, to complete the treatment successfully 

### priorto release from prison, to comply with general rules and regulations 

### of Probation and 

### Parole, Bench Warrant to be rescinded, the 

### sentence in this case to run consecutive

5to the sentence imposed by The Court 

### ofCommon Pleas 

### ofPhiladelphia County in the 

### matter No. 14700-2010. On April 14, 2016, the Defendant filed a Post-Conviction 

### ReliefAct PetitionFor 

### Allowance OfAn Appeal Nunc Pro Tune, explaining that his attorney had not filed a Notice of Appeal by February 6, 2016. On April 20, 2016, by way 

### ofa 

### court Order, the court appointed Scott D. Galloway, Esquire, to represent the Defendant. On January 18, 2017, the court issued

an Order granting the Defendant the right to file a Nunc Pro Tune Direct Appeal to the Superior Court 

### ofPennsylvania within thirty days. On February 16, 2017, the 

### Defendant filed a timely 

### Notice 

### ofAppeal. On 

### February 21, 2017, the Court directedthe Defendant to file a Concise 

### Statement 

### ofMatters 

### Complained ofon Appeal. On March 13, 2017, the 

### Defendant filed a Concise Statement 

### ofMatters Complained 

### ofon Appeal in 

### compliance with the provisions 

### of Pa.P.A.P. 1925(b). The 

### Defendant raises the following issues for appellate review:

1. The revocation Hearing 

### that took place [was] not timely. [The Defendant] was incarcerated 

### from June 7, 2010 and the revocation did not occur until January 8, 2016. The original sentence imposed was 

### six (6) to twenty three (23) months followed by one year probation. Once [the Defendant] reached the maximum, the detainer 

### should have been lifted and the violations dismissed. 2. [The Defendant] was 

### never provided with written notice 

### ofthe violations against him. 3. 

### Although the 

### court determined on the record that 

### probation was to be revoked, the reasons for said revocation were neverplaced in writing nor was it ever stated as to 

### what specific evidence was relied upon by the fact finder and in addition, the reasons for 

### revoking probation were neverplaced in writing. 4. The 

### Commonwealth 

### ofPennsylvania during said Hearing 

### alleged that Defendant was in 

### violation for new charges 

### that occurred in 

### Philadelphia [County] in 2006 which was 

### before the time he was placed on 

### probation for the present matter. 5. The 

### Commonwealth [ofPennsylvania] erred in alleging that the Defendant was in violation for 

### failure to comply with a treatment program that was never a 

### part 

### of his original sentence. Therefore, revocation 

### ofprobation based on a condition that was not 

### imposed by the [c]ourt is legal error.

6

### DISCUSSION I. 

### The Gagnon 

### II Hearing took place within a 

### reasonable time. The first issue raised 

### for appellate reviewpresents a challenge to the timeliness 

### of the Gagnon II Hearing. The 

### court held a timely Gagnon II 

### Hearing, as it is illustrated in 

### the Case Timeline, a copy 

### ofwhich is attached hereto, and incorporated by reference, as Exhibit 

### "A." Pennsylvania Rule 

### ofCriminal Procedure 708, Subsection (B), provides in relevant parts: "Whenever a defendant has been sentenced to 

### probation or intermediate punishment, or placed on parole, the

### judge shall not revoke such probation, intermediate punishment, or

### parole as allowed by lawunless there has been: (1) a hearing held as 

### speedily as 

### possible at which the defendant is 

### present and represented by counsel; (2) a finding 

### ofrecord that the 

### defendant violated a condition 

### ofprobation, intermediate 

### punishment, or 

### parole." Pa.R.Crim.P.708(B)(1), (2). "The language 

### 'speedily as 

### possible' has been interpreted to require a hearing within a reasonable time. 

### Rule 708 does not establish a

### presumptive period in which [probation is revoked]; but instead, the 

### question is 

### whether the delay 

### was reasonable under the circumstances 

### ofthe specific case and 

### whether the appellant was 

### prejudiced by the 

### delay." Commonwealthv. Woods, 965 A.2d 1225, 1227 (Pa. Super. 2009). "In evaluating the reasonableness 

### ofa delay, the court examines three factors: the length 

### ofthe delay; the reasons for the delay; and

### the prejudice resulting to the defendant

### from the delay." Commonwealth v. Clark, 847 

### A.2d 122, 124 (Pa. Super. 2004). 

### "The court must analyze the circumstances surrounding the delay to 

### determine 

### ifthe Commonwealth 

### acted with diligence in scheduling the revocation 

### hearing." Ibid. 

### "Prejudice in this context compromises the loss 

### ofessential witnesses

7or evidence, the absence ofwhich would obfuscate the determination ofwhether probation was violated, or unnecessary restraint 

### ofpersonal liberty." Ibid. The court also 

### notes that "there is no requirement that the 

### Gagnon II hearing be held before the 

### probationer's trial[.] Indeed it may in many cases be preferable to defer that hearing until after the trial, thus avoiding the possibly unjust result 

### ofrevoking probation, only to find later that the probationer has been acquitted 

### of the charges that prompted the revocation hearing." Commonwealth v. 

### Davis, 336 A.2d 616, 623 (Pa.. Super. 1975). The Gagnon II Hearing took place within a 

### reasonable time under the circumstances 

### ofthis case. First, during the time period 

### betweenJune, 2010, and March 2011, the 

### Delaware County Office 

### ofAdult Probation and Parole, and the 

### Commonwealth 

### of Pennsylvania, deferred the 

### scheduling 

### ofthe Gagnon II Hearing to allow time for the 

### Defendant's criminal cases 

### in Philadelphia County to be resolved, and 

### thus, have complete 

### information on the disposition 

### ofthose cases before moving forward. Such deferment was deemed necessary to prevent a possible unjust result to the Defendant. Second, during the time period between April 2011, and July 2012, when the Gagnon II 

### Hearing was scheduled to take place, defense counsel requested multiple continuances. Although some 

### ofthe 

### defense's requests for continuances were attributedto defense 

### counsel's terminal illness, the vast 

### majority 

### ofthose 

### requests were a 

### result 

### ofthe 

### defense's attempt to reach a resolution 

### ofthe cases in both 

### counties contemporaneously. The Gagnon II 

### Hearing was 

### ultimately held on April 26, 

### 2011 Third, the 

### Defendant's Sentencing Hearing took place on 

### January 8, 2016, as a result 

### ofthe 

### defense's additional requests for continuances while the 

### disposition ofthe 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County was pending. 

### The 

### defense's requests resulted in over

8twenty (20) continuances between April, 2013 and January 8, 2016, when the 

### court was able to hold the Sentencing Hearing and 

### impose the new sentence. Finally, no prejudice resulted to the Defendant due to the delay. 

### The majority 

### of the requests for continuances were made by the Defense, in orderto resolve the 

### Defendant's

cases in Delaware County and 

### Philadelphia County during the same period 

### oftime. The Defendant was able to fully 

### present his case at the Gagnon 11 Hearing. 

### There was no loss 

### of essential witnesses or evidence 

### which adversely contributed to the 

### court's determination 

### ofthe

case. The delay did notcause the 

### Defendant to remain incarcerated longer

### than necessary; the Defendant was to remain incarcerated in Philadelphia County awaiting the disposition 

### ofthose

cases regardless 

### ofthe developments in this case. While a 

### relatively considerable amount 

### of time passed before a Gagnon II 

### Hearing took place, the delay was reasonable 

### under the circumstances 

### ofthis case and the Defendant was notprejudiced 

### by such delay. 

### II. The 

### court did 

### not 

### err when it 

### revoked the 

### Defendant's probation and 

### parole during the Gagnon H 

### Hearing and imposed a 

### new sentence, Issues two (2), three (3), four (4) and five (5) are meritless. 

### CONCLUSION For the foregoing rensons,

### the Judgment of Sentence should be affirmed on

BY 

### THE COURT:

GEORGE A. 

### PAGANO, 

### J.

9

### EXHIBIT "A"

10

### IN 

### THE COURT OF COMMONPLEAS OF DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CRIMINAL DIVISION



### COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA CP-23-CR-0008238-2007

vs. 

### ADRIAN 

### SIMS-EL



## CASE 

## TIMELINE Note: Dates and events in bold letters pertain to this case. 

### Date Case 

### Event Case 

### Event Status May 27, 2010 

### Bench 

### warrant issued 

### June 7, 2010 

### Defendant incarcerated 

### June 22, 2010 

### Gagnon 

### I Hearing held 

### Defendant held

### for Gagnon 

### II September 24, 2010 Defendant charged with two cases in Philadelphia County November 24, 2010 Preliminary Hearing 

### held on one 

### ofDefendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defendant held for court 

### December 10, 2010 Hearing on 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance December 30, 2010 Hearing on 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance February 16, 2011 

### Preliminary Hearing on one 

### ofDefendant's case in 

### Philadelphia County

### held Defendant held for court March 3, 2011 Hearing on 

### Defendant's case in Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance 

### March 29, 2011 

### Pretrial bring-back Continuance Ayril 6, 2011 

### Pretrial bring-back Defense continuance 

### April 12, 2011 

### Pretrial bring-back Continuance April 18, 2011 Scheduling conference for 

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia County held May 10, 2011 Scheduling conference for 

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia Comity 

### Continuance May 17, 2011 

### Scheduling conference for

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance May 24, 2011 Scheduling conference for 

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia County Defense continuance

11May 31, 2011 Hearing for 

### Defendant's case in Philadelphia County Continuance 

### August 5, 2011 Hearing for 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County held 

### August 31, 2011 Hearing for 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Continuance by Defense and Commonwealth 

### September 23, 2011 Hearing for 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Commonwealth continuance 

### October 24, 2011 Hearing for 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance 

### November 10, 2011 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance 

### January 10, 2012 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Continuance by Defense and Commonwealth January 30, 2012 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance April 25, 2012 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases inPhiladelphia County Defense continuance 

### July 11, 2012 

### Gagnon 

### II Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance August 22,2012 Gagnon

### II Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance 

### September 26, 2012 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance December 12, 2012 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases inPhiladelphia County Continuance 

### January 4, 2013 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance 

### January 9, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance February 15, 2013 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases inPhiladelphia County Defense continuance 

### Febrtiary 27, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance March 15, 2013 Trial date 

### Defendant's cases in Philadelphia County Defense continuance 

### March 27, 2013 

### Gagnon 

### II Hearing scheduled Continuance by the court April 26, 2013 

### Gagnon H 

### Hearingheld The 

### court continued the 

### Hearing to allow Defense counsel and 

### the Commonwealth to 

### submit 

### briefs 

### regarding theissue of 

### timeliness and 

### the 

### standard for 

### Commonwealth's burden of 

### proofwith 

### regard to 

### Defendant's violations. 

### Court willing to 

### wait on 

### disposition of 

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia County before imposing sentence. 

### June 11, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense continuance. Defense 

### attorney did 

### not file 

### brief. 

### July 9, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense continuance. Defense 

### attorney did 

### not file brief. 

### July 23, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance July 29 2013 

### Gagnon H 

### Hearing scheduled Commonwealth continuance August 12, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance

12

### October 7, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled. 

### Defense 

### continuance November 13, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance 

### November 26, 2013 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance. Defense 

### attorney did 

### not file brief. 

### January 22, 2014 

### Gagnon II 

### Hearing scheduled. Defense 

### continuance 

### February 25, 2014 

### Gagnon 

### II Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance 

### March 4, 2014 

### Gagnon 

### II Hearing scheduled Defense continuance. Defense 

### request for 

### appointment of new counsel 

### for Defendant. 

### Harry Seay, 

### Esquire, no 

### longer able to 

### continue 

### Defendant's representation due to 

### terminal illness. 

### March 20, 

### 2014 Gregory J. 

### Pagano, Esquire, entershis appearance as 

### Defendant'scounsel. 

### April 22, 2014 

### Gagnon 

### II Hearing held 

### Continuation of

### the Hearing held on 

### April 26, 2013. 

### June11, 2014 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing Hearing scheduled 

### Court continuance 

### July 22, 2014 

### Gagnon H 

### Sentencing Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance August 5, 2014 Defendant's trial in Philadelphia County scheduled 

### September 2, 2014 

### Gagnon II 

### Sentencing Hearing scheduled Commonwealth and Defense 

### request for a 

### continuance due to 

### Delaware County Sheriff's Office 

### inability to 

### transport Defendant. 

### October 1, 2014 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing Hearing scheduled Defense continuance. 

### Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia County. November 5, 2014 

### Defendant's Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County Continuance 

### November 18, 

### 2014 Gagnon II 

### Sentencing 

### Hearing scheduled. Defense 

### continuance. 

### Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases 

### in 

### Philadelphia County. December 18, 2014 

### Defendant's Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County held 

### December24, 2014 

### Defendant's Status Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance 

### January 13, 2015 

### Gagnon II 

### Sentencing 

### Hearing scheduled. Defense 

### continuance. 

### Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases 

### in 

### Philadelphia County. January 22, 2015 

### Defendant's Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County Continuance

13

### February 18, 2015 

### Gagnon H 

### Sentencing 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance. Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases 

### in 

### Philadelphia County. 

### March 18, 2015 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance. Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases in 

### Philadelphia County. March 19, 2015 

### Defendant's Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance August 21, 2015 

### Defendant's Assessment Hearingin Philadelphia County scheduled Continuance 

### September 9, 2015 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing 

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### continuance. Court willing to 

### postpone Hearing to 

### wait disposition of

### Defendant's cases 

### in 

### Philadelphia County. November 13, 2015 

### Defendant's Assessment Hearing and Sentencing Hearing in Philadelphia County held 

### November 19, 2015 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing

### Hearing scheduled Defense 

### request to 

### conduct 

### Gagnon 

### II Sentencing 

### Hearing through Audio-Visual 

### (Defendant held in 

### SCIRockview). Audio Visual 

### Department and Delaware 

### County 

### Sheriffs Office 

### unable to 

### coordinate. Gagnon 

### II Sentencing 

### Hearing continued. November 13, 2015 Defendant sentenced in Philadelphia County 

### December 4, 2015 

### Gagnon H 

### Sentencing Hearing scheduled Defensecontinuance 

### January 8, 2016 

### Gagnon 

### II SentencingHearing held Sentence imposed April 20, 2016 Scott D. Galloway, 

### Esquire, begins 

### representation 

### ofDefendant Court appointed

14