Court Opinion

ID: 9412030
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-28 18:11:23.93475+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:24.872266
License: Public Domain

J-S14015-23

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA       :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                    :        PENNSYLVANIA
                                    :
              v.                    :
                                    :
                                    :
 LOUIS RUSHAD CAMPBELL              :
                                    :
                   Appellant        :   No. 1361 WDA 2022

         Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered October 21, 2022
              In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County
          Criminal Division at No(s): CP-07-CR-0000872-2017

 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA       :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                    :        PENNSYLVANIA
                                    :
              v.                    :
                                    :
                                    :
 LOUIS RUSHAD CAMPBELL              :
                                    :
                   Appellant        :   No. 1374 WDA 2022

         Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered October 21, 2022
              In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County
          Criminal Division at No(s): CP-07-CR-0000938-2017

 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA       :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                    :        PENNSYLVANIA
                                    :
              v.                    :
                                    :
                                    :
 LOUIS RUSHAD CAMPBELL              :
                                    :
                   Appellant        :   No. 1375 WDA 2022

         Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered October 21, 2022
              In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County
          Criminal Division at No(s): CP-07-CR-0000955-2017

 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA       :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
                                    :        PENNSYLVANIA
J-S14015-23

                                                 :
                v.                               :
                                                 :
                                                 :
  LOUIS RUSHAD CAMPBELL                          :
                                                 :
                       Appellant                 :   No. 1376 WDA 2022

             Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered October 11, 2022
                  In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County
              Criminal Division at No(s): CP-07-CR-0000939-2017

BEFORE:      PANELLA, P.J., BENDER, P.J.E., and PELLEGRINI, J.*

MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, P.J.:                         FILED: July 28, 2023

       Louis Rushad Campbell appeals from the order entered in the Blair

County Court of Common Pleas on October 22, 2022, dismissing Campbell’s

petitions1 filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.

C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. Campbell’s counsel has filed a brief in which he

concludes there are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal.2 As we find

____________________________________________

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

1 Campbell filed separate notices of appeal under the four lower court dockets

involved. We consolidated the appeals sua sponte as they raised identical
challenges to the PCRA court’s order.

2 We note that PCRA counsel has not cited to the proper authorities in his brief

to support his request to withdraw as counsel based on his finding that there
are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal. When counsel seeks to
withdraw from representation on collateral appeal, as here, Turner and
Finley apply. See Commonwealth v. Widgins, 29 A.3d 816, 817 n.2 (Pa.
Super. 2011) (citing Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988);
Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (en banc)). On
its own, counsel’s mistake is not fatal to his application to withdraw, though,
as we can nevertheless evaluate whether the brief submitted substantially
satisfies Turner/Finley criteria. See id. at 819.

                                           -2-
J-S14015-23

counsel’s attempt to withdraw is deficient, we instruct counsel to correct those

deficiencies before we may address this appeal on its merits.

      On December 17, 2019, Campbell entered an open nolo contendere plea

to all counts of the criminal information at the above dockets. Sentencing was

deferred for preparation of a presentence investigation report. Despite being

represented by counsel, Campbell filed a pro se motion to withdraw his guilty

plea. The trial court dismissed the motion without prejudice to allow Campbell

to file a counseled motion. Counsel subsequently filed a new motion to

withdraw the guilty plea. The trial court denied the motion and sentenced

Campbell to an aggregate term of twelve years and three months to twenty-

four and one-half years’ incarceration.

      Campbell subsequently filed pro se PCRA petitions under each separate

docket from December 2020 to January 2021. Counsel was appointed and

filed an amended PCRA petition, followed by a second amended petition. After

two evidentiary hearings, the PCRA court denied the PCRA petition on October

24, 2022. That same day, counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel with

the PCRA court. A hearing on the motion was scheduled.

      Counsel subsequently filed a notice of appeal on Campbell’s behalf in

order to protect Campbell’s appellate rights. The PCRA court then filed an

order stating it would take no further action on counsel’s motion to withdraw,

along with a pro se motion seeking counsel’s withdrawal, due to the notice of

appeal transferring jurisdiction to this Court. Counsel has since filed a new

                                     -3-
J-S14015-23

motion to withdraw with this Court, along with a brief stating there are no

non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal.

      Before any substantive analysis, we must examine whether PCRA

counsel has met the procedural requirements for withdrawing as counsel.

             Counsel petitioning to withdraw from PCRA representation
      must proceed … under [Turner], and [Finley] … Turner/Finley
      counsel must review the case zealously. Turner/Finley counsel
      must then submit a “no-merit” letter to the trial court, or brief on
      appeal to this Court, detailing the nature and extent of counsel's
      diligent review of the case, listing the issues which the petitioner
      wants to have reviewed, explaining why and how those issues lack
      merit, and requesting permission to withdraw.
      Counsel must also send to the petitioner: (1) a copy of the “no-
      merit” letter/brief; (2) a copy of counsel's petition to withdraw;
      and (3) a statement advising petitioner of the right to proceed pro
      se or by new counsel.

            If counsel fails to satisfy the foregoing technical
      prerequisites of Turner/Finley, the court will not reach the merits
      of the underlying claims but, rather, will merely deny counsel's
      request to withdraw. Upon doing so, the court will then take
      appropriate steps, such as directing counsel to file a proper
      Turner/Finley request or an advocate's brief.

             However, where counsel submits a petition and no-merit
      letter that do satisfy the technical demands of Turner/Finley, the
      court—trial court or this Court—must then conduct its own review
      of the merits of the case. If the court agrees with counsel that the
      claims are without merit, the court will permit counsel to withdraw
      and deny relief. By contrast, if the claims appear to have merit,
      the court will deny counsel's request and grant relief, or at least
      instruct counsel to file an advocate's brief.

Commonwealth v. Wreck, 931 A.2d 717, 721 (Pa. Super. 2007) (some

citations omitted)

      Here, counsel submitted a brief with this Court which concludes there

are no non-frivolous issues to raise on appeal. This conclusion appears to be

                                     -4-
J-S14015-23

based solely on the PCRA court’s opinion. See Appellant’s Brief, at 6. Counsel

does not detail the extent of his review, evaluate any issues, nor even mention

any issues.

      In addition, while counsel included a copy of a letter sent to Campbell,

there is no indication that a copy of his petition to withdraw and accompanying

brief was ever sent to Campbell. On the contrary, the letter to Campbell

indicated the petition to withdraw will be forthcoming but had not yet been

filed. See Application to Withdraw As Counsel, 1/18/23, Exhibit A.

      Further, “in an appeal from the denial of a PCRA petition, if counsel files

a petition to withdraw as appellate counsel in this Court, the letter to the client

[] shall inform the PCRA petitioner that upon the filing of counsel's petition to

withdraw, the petitioner-appellant has the immediate right to proceed in the

appeal pro se or through privately-retained counsel.” Commonwealth v.

Muzzy, 141 A.3d 509, 512 (Pa. Super. 2016). While counsel’s letter to

Campbell informs Campbell of his right to proceed with or without an attorney,

it is not clear that that right may be exercised immediately. See Application

to Withdraw As Counsel, 1/18/23, Exhibit A.

      Accordingly, we deny the motion to withdraw currently before us, and

we direct counsel to either file an advocate's brief or a petition to withdraw

that meets the requirements pursuant to Turner/Finley within 15 days. If

counsel elects to file a petition to withdraw, he must also comply with the

notice requirements of Commonwealth v. Millisock, 873 A.2d 748, 752 (Pa.

                                       -5-
J-S14015-23

Super. 2005), and file proof thereof with this Court. Namely, counsel must

attach to the petition a copy of a letter sent to Campbell, fully advising him of

his immediate right, either pro se or with privately retained counsel, to file a

brief on any additional points he deems worthy of review, and advise Campbell

that he may respond, within 30 days of counsel's letter, to counsel's brief, if

he so chooses. The Commonwealth will then have 30 days to respond to

anything filed by current PCRA counsel or Campbell.

      PCRA counsel to file an application to withdraw within fifteen (15) days

of the date this memorandum is filed and provide notice pursuant to

Turner/Finley. Campbell may respond to the application within thirty (30)

days of the date of the letter notifying him of the application to withdraw. In

the alternative, PCRA counsel may file an advocate's brief within fifteen (15)

days of the date of this memorandum. In either event, the Commonwealth

will be permitted to file a response to such filings, by either PCRA counsel or

Campbell, within thirty (30) days of the date they are filed in this Court.

      Motion to withdraw denied. Panel jurisdiction retained.

                                      -6-