Court Opinion

ID: 9958566
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-09 16:12:14.296015+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:29.068457
License: Public Domain

J-S08015-24

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

  COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA                 :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                               :        PENNSYLVANIA
                                               :
                 v.                            :
                                               :
                                               :
  JARRETT ALVIN KINLEY                         :
                                               :
                       Appellant               :   No. 1009 MDA 2023

             Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered June 20, 2023
      In the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County Criminal
                 Division at No(s): CP-49-CR-0000801-2016

BEFORE:      OLSON, J., MURRAY, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*

MEMORANDUM BY OLSON, J.:                       FILED: APRIL 9, 2024

       Appellant, Jarrett Alvin Kinley, appeals from the June 20, 2023 order

entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland County that

dismissed, without prejudice, his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction

Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We vacate the order and

remand     the    case   for   further    proceedings   in   accordance   with   this

memorandum.

       The record demonstrates that, on February 6, 2019, a jury convicted

Appellant of rape by forcible compulsion (Count 1), rape of a child (Count 2),

involuntary deviate sexual intercourse by forcible compulsion (Count 3),

involuntary deviate sexual intercourse - complainant less than sixteen years

of age but assailant is four or more years older than complainant (Count 4),
____________________________________________

* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S08015-24

incest of a minor – person less than 13 years of age (Count 5), and indecent

assault - complainant less than thirteen years of age (Count 6).1            On

September 18, 2019, Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate sentence of

30 to 60 years’ incarceration and a consecutive term of 3 years’ probation.

Appellant filed a timely post-sentence motion, which the trial court

subsequently denied.

       On direct appeal, this Court affirmed Appellant’s convictions but vacated

his sentence and remanded the case for resentencing because the trial court

did not impose individualized sentences. Our Supreme Court subsequently

denied Appellant’s petition for allowance of appeal, and the Supreme Court of

the United Stated denied Appellant’s petition for writ of certiorari on February

22, 2022. Commonwealth v. Kinley, 251 A.3d 1239, 2021 WL 983020, at

*9 (Pa. Super. filed Mar. 16, 2021) (unpublished memorandum), appeal

denied, 262 A.3d 455 (Pa. 2021), cert. denied, 142 S.Ct. 1139 (2022).

       Upon resentencing, on August 29, 2022, the trial court imposed, inter

alia, an aggregate sentence of 30 to 60 years’ incarceration.2 Appellant did
____________________________________________

1 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3121(a)(1), 3121(c), 3123(a)(1), 3123(a)(7), 4302(b)(1),

and 3126(a)(7), respectively.

Appellant’s first trial resulted in a mistrial on May 9, 2018, after defense
counsel’s opening remarks violated the Rape Shield Law, 18 Pa.C.S.A.
§ 3104(a). See Trial Court Order, 5/9/18.

2 On Count 1, Appellant was resentenced to 10 to 20 years’ incarceration with

the sentence set to run consecutively to the sentence imposed at Count 2. On
Count 2, Appellant was resentenced to 20 to 40 years’ incarceration. On

                                           -2-
J-S08015-24

not appeal his new sentence with this Court. As such, Appellant’s judgment

of sentence became final on September 28, 2022.          See Pa.R.A.P. 903(a)

(stating that, a notice of appeal “shall be filed within 30 days after the entry

of the order from which the appeal is taken”); see also 42 Pa.C.S.A.

§ 9545(b)(3) (stating, “a judgment becomes final at the conclusion of direct

review, including discretionary review in the Supreme Court of the United

States and the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, or at the expiration of time

for seeking the review”).

          On February 17, 2023, Appellant filed a counseled PCRA petition, his

first.3     Thereafter, the PCRA court scheduled an evidentiary hearing on

Appellant’s petition.     PCRA Court Order, 3/6/23 (scheduling an evidentiary

hearing for April 24, 2023); see also PCRA Court Order, 3/10/23 (continuing

____________________________________________

Count 3, Appellant was resentenced to 10 to 20 years’ incarceration with the
sentence set to run concurrently to the sentence imposed at Count 1. On
Count 4, Appellant was resentenced to 10 to 20 years’ incarceration with the
sentence set to run concurrently to the sentence imposed at Count 1. On
Count 5, Appellant was resentenced to 2 to 10 years’ incarceration with the
sentence set to run concurrently to the sentence imposed at Count 1. On
Count 6, Appellant was resentenced to 6 months’ to 2 years’ incarceration
with the sentence set to run concurrently to the sentence imposed at Count 1.
Appellant was given credit for time served from March 19, 2016, to March 24,
2016, and from February 6, 2019, to September 18, 2019. On Counts 1, 3,
4, 5, and 6, Appellant was ordered to pay a $100.00 fine. Appellant was also
subject to a lifetime registration under Subchapter H of the Sex Offender
Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9799.11 to
9799.40, as a Tier III sexual offender. See 42 Pa.C.S.A § 9799.14(d); see
also 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9799.15(a)(3).

3 Counsel entered her appearance on behalf of Appellant on January 17, 2023.

                                           -3-
J-S08015-24

the evidentiary hearing to June 27, 2023); PCRA Court Order, 6/8/23

(continuing the evidentiary hearing to August 29, 2023). On June 12, 2023,

the Commonwealth filed a motion to dismiss Appellant’s petition on the ground

that the “motion” filed by Appellant did not contain the requisite allegations

necessary to constitute a PCRA petition but, rather, was a “brief” containing

186 pages of argument.4           On June 20, 2023, the PCRA court dismissed

Appellant’s petition without prejudice.

       The next day, on June 21, 2023, Appellant filed a response to the

Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss. On June 26, 2023, the Commonwealth

filed a motion to dismiss Appellant’s response as moot, which the PCRA court

granted on June 28, 2023. On June 30, 2023, Appellant filed a motion to

vacate the PCRA court’s June 20, 2023 order dismissing his petition without

prejudice.5 On July 17, 2023, Appellant filed a notice of appeal challenging

____________________________________________

4 In its motion to dismiss Appellant’s petition, the Commonwealth averred the

following:

       1. [Appellant’s] counsel filed a motion for [collateral] relief under
          the [PCRA].
       2. The motion filed is not[,] in fact[,] a motion[,] it is a brief
          containing 186 pages of argument.
       3. While arguing the brief, [Appellant’s] counsel has not rendered
          a pleading that contains the requisite allegations needed for a
          PCRA petition to continue on to the brief stage.

Commonwealth’s Motion to Dismiss, 6/12/19 (extraneous capitalization
omitted).

5 The PCRA court took no action on Appellant’s motion to vacate the June 20,

2023 order.

                                           -4-
J-S08015-24

the PCRA court’s June 20, 2023 order dismissing his petition without

prejudice.6

       Appellant raises the following issues for our review:

       [1.]   Because [Appellant’s] PCRA petition was not defective as
              originally filed (as that term is meant under [Pennsylvania
              Rule of Criminal Procedure] 905(B) and defined by the
              official comment to [Rule] 905), and he demonstrated his
              entitlement to an evidentiary hearing on each of the claims
              raised, must his case be remanded for the evidentiary
              hearing that the PCRA court already determined was
              necessary and appropriate?

       [2.]   Did the PCRA court err by dismissing the PCRA petition
              without ordering amendment of the petition, indicating the
              nature of the defects, and specifying the time within which
              an amended petition must have been filed, in violation of
              the mandatory language of [Rule] 905(B)?

       [3.]   Did the PCRA court err by dismissing [Appellant’s] PCRA
              petition where it failed to first provide notice to [Appellant]
              of its intention to dismiss, and failed to state any reasons
              for the dismissal, in violation of the mandatory language of
              [Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure] 907(1)?

       [4.]   Did the PCRA court err by dismissing [Appellant’s] PCRA
              petition without a hearing where there existed genuine
              issues concerning material facts as to each of the claims
              raised, which, in turn, demonstrated [Appellant’s]
              entitlement to an evidentiary hearing, and where the PCRA
              court already had been satisfied that an evidentiary hearing
              “on each of the claims raised” in [Appellant’s] PCRA petition
              was necessary and appropriate?

       [5.]   Did the PCRA court err by dismissing [Appellant’s] PCRA
              petition where [Appellant] successfully demonstrated that
              trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel
              pursuant to Article [I], Section 9 of the Pennsylvania
____________________________________________

6 Both Appellant and the PCRA court complied with Pennsylvania Rule of
Appellate Procedure 1925.

                                           -5-
J-S08015-24

              Constitution and the Sixth Amendment to the United States
              Constitution for failing to file a motion to dismiss and bar
              retrial on double jeopardy grounds, pursuant to Article [I],
              Section 10 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Fifth
              Amendment to the United States Constitution, and
              [Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure] 605(B)?

Appellant’s Brief at 4-5 (extraneous capitalization omitted).7

       Appellant’s first and second issues challenge the PCRA court’s order

dismissing his petition, without prejudice, on the ground that the PCRA court

dismissed his petition without first permitting him an opportunity to file an

amended petition pursuant to Rule 905(B). Id. at 21-30.

       It is well-settled that appellate review of a PCRA court’s dismissal of a

petition is limited to an examination of “whether the PCRA court’s

determination is supported by the record and free of legal error.”

Commonwealth v. Miller, 102 A.3d 988, 992 (Pa. Super. 2014) (citation

omitted).

       Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 902 states, in pertinent part,

as follows:

       Rule 902. Content of Petition for Post-Conviction Collateral
       Relief; Request for Discovery

       (A) A petition for post-conviction collateral relief shall bear the
       caption, number, and court term of the case or cases in which
       relief is requested and shall contain substantially the following
       information:

       (1) the name of the defendant;
____________________________________________

7 On February 9, 2023, the Commonwealth filed a letter with this Court
indicating, inter alia, that it did not intend to file a response brief.

                                           -6-
J-S08015-24

     (2) the place where the defendant is confined, or if not confined,
     the defendant's current address;

     (3) the offenses for which the defendant was convicted and
     sentenced;

     (4) the date on which the defendant was sentenced;

     (5) whether the defendant was convicted by a jury, by a judge
     without jury, on a plea of guilty, or on a plea of nolo contendere;

     (6) the sentence imposed and whether the defendant is now
     serving or waiting to serve that sentence;

     (7) the name of the judge who presided at trial or plea and
     imposed sentence;

     (8) the court, caption, term, and number of any proceeding
     (including appeals, prior post-conviction collateral proceedings,
     and federal court proceedings) instituted by the defendant to
     obtain relief from conviction or sentence, specifying whether a
     proceeding is pending or has been completed;

     (9) the name of each lawyer who represented the defendant at
     any time after arrest, and the stage of the case at which each
     represented the defendant;

     (10) the relief requested;

     (11) the grounds for the relief requested;

     (12) the facts supporting each such ground that:

        (a) appear in the record, and the place in the record where
        they appear; and

        (b) do not appear in the record, and an identification of any
        affidavits, documents, and other evidence showing such
        facts;

     (13) whether any of the grounds for the relief requested were
     raised before, and if so, at what stage of the case;

     (14) a verification by the defendant that:

        (a) the facts set forth in the petition are true and correct to
        the best of the defendant's personal knowledge or
        information and belief and that any false statements therein
        are made subject to the penalties of the Crimes Code, 18

                                     -7-
J-S08015-24

         Pa.C.S.[A.] § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to
         authorities; and

         (b) the attorney filing the petition is authorized by the
         defendant to file the petition on the defendant's behalf;

      (15) if applicable, any request for an evidentiary hearing. The
      request for an evidentiary hearing shall include a signed
      certification as to each intended witness, stating the witness's
      name, address, and date of birth, and the substance of the
      witness's testimony. Any documents material to the witness's
      testimony shall also be included in the petition; and

      (16) if applicable, any request for discovery.

      The petition may, but need not, include concise argument or
      citation and discussion of authorities.

      (B) Each ground relied upon in support of the relief requested
      shall be stated in the petition. Failure to state such a ground in
      the petition shall preclude the defendant from raising that ground
      in any proceeding for post-conviction collateral relief.

      (C) The defendant shall state in the petition the name and address
      of the attorney who will represent the defendant in the
      post-conviction collateral proceeding. If the defendant is unable
      to afford or otherwise procure counsel, and wants counsel
      appointed, the defendant shall so state in the petition and shall
      request the appointment of counsel.

      (D) The defendant shall attach to the petition any affidavits,
      records, documents, or other evidence which show the facts
      stated in support of the grounds for relief, or the petition shall
      state why they are not attached.

Pa.R.Crim.P. 902(A) to (D).

      Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 905 states, in pertinent part,

as follows:

      Rule 905. Amendment and Withdrawal of Petition for
      Post-Conviction Collateral Relief

                                     -8-
J-S08015-24

      (A) The judge may grant leave to amend or withdraw a petition
      for post-conviction collateral relief at any time. Amendment shall
      be freely allowed to achieve substantial justice.

      (B) When a petition for post-conviction collateral relief is defective
      as originally filed, the judge shall order amendment of the
      petition, indicate the nature of the defects, and specify the time
      within which an amended petition shall be filed. If the order
      directing amendment is not complied with, the petition may be
      dismissed without a hearing.

Pa.R.Crim.P. 905(A) and (B).

      In the case sub judice, the PCRA court explained its reasons for

dismissing Appellant’s petition, without prejudice, as follows, “[Appellant’s

petition] appears to be more in the nature of a [b]rief than a [p]etition setting

forth the allegations which could then be fleshed out through [later] briefing.”

PCRA Court Opinion, 11/23/23, at 3 (unpaginated).           In its Rule 1925(a)

opinion, the PCRA court requested that this Court remand the case with the

directive that Appellant file an amended petition “in a form more succinctly

setting forth the allegations which would then allow the [PCRA court] to hear

argument on this matter and direct the parties to issue [b]riefs on those areas

the [PCRA court] deemed necessary.” Id.

      The record reveals that Appellant filed his counseled PCRA petition on

February 17, 2023, and the PCRA court scheduled an evidentiary hearing on

the matter. On June 12, 2023, the Commonwealth filed a motion to dismiss

Appellant’s petition on the ground that it failed to set forth sufficient

allegations pursuant to Rule 902(A).      On June 20, 2023, the PCRA court

                                      -9-
J-S08015-24

entered an order dismissing Appellant’s petition without prejudice. 8        Rule

905(B) requires a PCRA court, upon determination that the petition is

defective as originally filed, to order the filing of an amended petition.

Pa.R.Crim.P. 905(B). In so ordering, the PCRA court must indicate the nature

of the defects and specify the time within which the petitioner shall file an

amended petition. Id. It is only after the petitioner fails to file an amended

petition within the timeframe provided that the PCRA court may dismiss the

petition without a hearing.9 Id. Here, the PCRA court, upon receiving the

____________________________________________

8 In its Rule 1925(a) opinion, the PCRA court stated that it dismissed
Appellant’s petition in an order entered on June 27, 2023. A review of the
PCRA court docket reveals that the order dismissing Appellant’s petition
without prejudice was, in fact, entered on June 20, 2023.

9 Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 907 permits a PCRA court to dismiss

a petition without an evidentiary hearing when the PCRA court, upon review
of the petition, is satisfied that no genuine issues concerning material facts
exist and that the petitioner is not entitled to collateral relief. Pa.R.Crim.P.
907(1). Before such a dismissal, however, the PCRA court must provide the
petitioner with notice of the intent to dismiss the petition and state the reasons
for the dismissal. Id. The petitioner must then be provided at least 20 days
in which to file a response to the notice of intent to dismiss the petition Id.

In reading Rule 907 in conjunction with Rule 905, we find that when a
petitioner files a petition that the PCRA court deems defective, a PCRA court
may only proceed with its notice to dismiss the petition pursuant to Rule 907
after the PCRA court has provided the petitioner with an opportunity to file an
amended petition pursuant to Rule 905(B) and the petitioner has failed to do
so. Otherwise if a petitioner files an amended petition pursuant to Rule
905(B), the PCRA court, upon review of the amended petition, may (1)
schedule an evidentiary hearing or (2) proceed in accordance with Rule 907
to provide notice of its intent to dismiss the petition if no genuine issues of
material fact exist and the PCRA court does not believe that the petitioner is
entitled to collateral relief.

                                          - 10 -
J-S08015-24

Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that it was

defective, agreed with the Commonwealth and dismissed Appellant’s petition

without prejudice. In so doing, the PCRA court erred by failing to first provide

Appellant notice of the nature of the defects and an opportunity to file an

amended petition pursuant to Rule 905(B).       Therefore, we conclude, as a

matter of law, that the PCRA court erred in dismissing Appellant’s petition

without prejudice.     Consequently, we vacate the June 20, 2023 order

dismissing Appellant’s petition without prejudice and remand this case so the

PCRA court may enter an order identifying the defects in Appellant’s petition

and offering Appellant an opportunity to file an amended petition.         See

Pa.R.Crim.P. 905(B).

      Order vacated. Case remanded. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Judgment Entered.

Benjamin D. Kohler, Esq.
Prothonotary

Date: 4/9/2024

                                     - 11 -