Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

[U] Commonwealth v. Henry

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

February 12, 2014

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee
v.
CRAIG HENRY, Appellant

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

Appeal from the PCRA Order February 20, 2013 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0000831-1983, CP-02-CR-0001205-1983

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., BOWES, and WECHT, JJ.

JUDGMENT ORDER

BOWES, J.

Craig Henry appeals from the order dismissing his PCRA petition as untimely. We affirm.

On August 26, 1983, a jury convicted Appellant of second-degree murder, robbery, and conspiracy. Appellant was twenty-two years old when he committed the crimes that led to those convictions. He was sentenced to life imprisonment on February 9, 1984, and we affirmed. Commonwealth v. Henry, 491 A.2d 918 (Pa.Super. 1985) (unpublished memorandum). Appellant filed four prior unsuccessful petitions for post-conviction relief. On appeal from denial of his fourth post-conviction petition, we noted that Appellant had until December 1986 to file a timely petition under the revisions to the PCRA enacted in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545, and that the fourth petition was untimely. Commonwealth v. Henry, 932 A.2d 254 (Pa.Super. 2006) (unpublished memorandum).

The present appeal involves challenges to the dismissal of Appellant's fifth PCRA petition. Appellant's arguments are: "A. Did [the] trial court abuse its discretion in ruling that the Supreme Court ruling in Miller [v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), ] has no bearing on the case at bar? B. Did [the] trial court abuse its discretion when it ruled without analyzing Equal Protection as applied to the facts at hand?" Appellant's brief at 1. "In reviewing the denial of PCRA relief, we examine whether the PCRA court's determinations are supported by the record and are free of legal error." Commonwealth v. Roney, 79 A.3d 595, 603 (Pa. 2013) (citation omitted). We have rejected a claim that the Miller decision, which held that it was unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile to a mandatory term of life imprisonment without parole, is applicable to mentally immature defendants who were legally adults when they committed the crime in question. Commonwealth v. Cintora, 69 A.3d 759 (Pa.Super. 2013). Since Appellant was an adult when he committed his offenses, Miller does not create an exception to the time bar of § 9545, and the PCRA court correctly ruled that Miller affords Appellant no relief. Id. Appellant's equal protection argument likewise does not render his petition timely. Id. We also observe that the Miller decision has been ruled not to apply retroactively to defendants seeking collateral relief. Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 2013 WL 5814388 (Pa. 2013).

Order affirmed. Judgment Entered.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.