J-S36042-15

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, 

 Appellee

v.

GEOFFREY ADAMS,

 Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 202 WDA 2015

Appeal from the Order Entered January 20, 2015, 

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, 

Criminal Division, at No(s): CP-02-CR-0010604-1984

BEFORE: PANELLA, JENKINS, and STRASSBURGER, JJ.*

MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED JULY 17, 2015

Geoffrey Adams (Appellant) appeals pro se from the order entered 

January 20, 2015, which denied his “petition for exemption.” We dismiss.

In 1988, Appellant was convicted of rape, involuntary deviate sexual 

intercourse, simple assault, unlawful restraint, and corruption of minors for 

an incident involving a 13-year-old girl. The trial court imposed an 

aggregate sentence of 15 to 30 years’ incarceration. A panel of this Court 

affirmed Appellant’s judgment of sentence, and his petition for allowance of 

appeal was denied. Commonwealth v. Adams, 564 A.2d 255 (Pa. Super. 

1988), appeal denied, 567 A.2d 650 (Pa. 1989).

Appellant served his maximum sentence and was released from 

incarceration on October 24, 2014. On October 27, 2014, Appellant filed the 

petition at issue in this case, entitled “petition for exemption.” In that 
J-S36042-15

- 2 -

petition, Appellant argued, in relevant part, that he purposely chose to serve 

out his maximum sentence, rather than be paroled, specifically to avoid 

certain registration requirements in the most recent version of Megan’s Law, 

passed on December 20, 2012. Specifically, he did not want to have 

information about his name, address, and crimes available on the Internet.1

On January 20, 2015, the trial court denied Appellant’s petition. 

Appellant timely filed a notice of appeal. The trial court did not request 

Appellant file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal; 

however, the trial court did author an opinion in support of dismissing the 

petition.

On appeal, Appellant attempts to present two claims for our 

consideration. However, before we reach the merits of those claims, we 

consider the contents of Appellant’s brief on appeal.

The Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure provide the 

following guidelines regarding the content of an appellant’s brief:

Rule 2111. Brief of the Appellant

(a) General Rule. The brief of the appellant, except as 

otherwise prescribed by these rules, shall consist of the following 

matters, separately and distinctly and in the following order:

(1) Statement of Jurisdiction.

 

1

In his petition, Appellant refers to “42 Pa.C.S. § 9798.1 (relating to 

information made available on the Internet and electronic notification).” 

Petition, 10/27/2014. As of December 20, 2012, that section was replaced 

by 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.28.
J-S36042-15

- 3 -

(2) Statement of both the scope of review and the 

standard of review.

(3) Order or other determination in question.

(4) Statement of the questions involved.

(5) Statement of the case.

(6) Summary of the argument.

(7) Argument for appellant.

(8) A short conclusion stating the precise relief 

sought.

(9) The opinions ... specified in Subdivision (b) ... of 

this rule.

(b) Opinion Below. There shall be appended to the brief a copy 

of any opinions delivered by any court or other government unit 

below relating to the order or other determination under review, 

if pertinent to the questions involved.

(emphasis in original).

Commonwealth v. Greenwalt, 796 A.2d 996, 996-97 (Pa. Super. 2002).

[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. This Court may ... dismiss an 

appeal if an appellant fails to conform with the requirements set 

forth in the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure. For 

example, 

[t]he argument [section] shall be divided into 

as many parts as there are questions to be argued; 

and shall have as the head of each part-in distinctive 

type or in type distinctively displayed-the particular 

point treated therein, followed by such discussion 
J-S36042-15

- 4 -

and citation of authorities as are deemed 

pertinent. 

Pa.R.A.P. 2119(a).

Commonwealth v. Lyons, 833 A.2d 245, 251-52 (Pa. Super. 2003) (some 

citations omitted; emphasis added).

Instantly, Appellant’s entire “brief” is one page with an introductory 

statement and two questions he wishes to raise on appeal.2 It does not 

contain a statement of jurisdiction, statement of scope and standard of 

review, statement of the case, summary of the argument, the relief sought, 

or even the opinion authored by the lower court. Most critically, the brief is 

devoid of an argument section. “When issues are not properly raised and 

developed in briefs, [and] when the briefs are wholly inadequate to present 

specific issues for review[, this] Court will not consider the merits thereof.” 

Commonwealth v. Rivera, 685 A.2d 1011, 1013 (Pa. Super. 1996)

(quoting Commonwealth v. Sanford, 445 A.2d 149, 150 (Pa. Super. 

1982)). See also Bolick v. Commonwealth, 69 A.3d 1267, 1269 (Pa. 

Super. 2013) (finding pro se appellant waived issue where he failed to 

present argument on appeal). 

 

2 Appellant also attaches the petition filed with the lower court, as well as 

several other documents. None of these documents presents any argument 

whatsoever.
J-S36042-15

- 5 -

Because the defects in Appellant’s brief are substantial, this Court is 

precluded from engaging in meaningful appellate review. For this reason, 

we dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 7/17/2015