Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

[U] Commonwealth v. Landrau-Melendez

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

February 18, 2014

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellant
v.
MIGUEL ANGEL LANDRAU-MELENDEZ Appellee

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION

Appeal from the Order Entered April 9, 2013 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-38-CR-0000309-2010

BEFORE: MUNDY, J., WECHT, J., and FITZGERALD, J. [*]

MEMORANDUM

MUNDY, J.

The Commonwealth appeals from the April 9, 2013 order granting Appellee, Miguel Angel Landrau-Melendez's petition for relief filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. After careful review, we reverse.

The PCRA court summarized the relevant facts and procedural history of this case as follows.

In 2010, [Appellee] was charged with numerous sexually-related offenses stemming from incidents involving two sisters that occurred between November 1, 2009 and February 3, 2010. During the pendency of the charges, [Appellee] hired Attorney John Kelsey, Esquire [(Attorney Kelsey)] to represent him. After pretrial maneuvering, [Appellee]'s case was ultimately scheduled for a trial the October 2010 term of [c]riminal [c]ourt.
A jury was scheduled to be selected in [Appellee]'s case on October 4, 2010. Immediately before jury selection, both counsel asked to meet with [the trial c]ourt in chambers. This meeting was not recorded, and a difference of opinion now exists with respect to what occurred at it. [Attorney Kelsey] testified at [Appellee]'s PCRA hearing that [the trial court] promised that he would not impose a sentence that exceeded a one-year minimum. This d[id] not at all comport with the recollection of [the trial court]. According to testimony at the PCRA hearing, [Attorney Kelsey] returned to [Appellee] following the meeting in chambers. [Attorney Kelsey] then led [Appellee] to believe that [the trial court] would impose a one[-]year minimum sentence. [Attorney Kelsey] even advised [Appellee] that there was a possibility that the sentence could be served in the Lebanon County Correctional Facility instead of a state correctional [f]acility when in fact there was no realistic possibility that a local sentence would ever be imposed.
[Appellee] decided to enter a plea of guilty. During the guilty plea colloquy, [the trial court] emphasized that the plea was an open one and that [Appellee] could be sentenced to anything up to the maximum penalty permitted by law. In addition, [the trial court] reminded [Appellee] that he was entering a plea of guilty on the first day of a scheduled jury trial. Because of the prejudice that would be created to the Commonwealth and its witnesses that would flow from renewed preparation and trial at a later date, [Appellee] was advised up front that a plea withdrawal at a later date would be extremely unlikely to occur. Effectively, [Appellee] was advised that his decision to plead guilty would be a final decision. Despite knowing this, [Appellee] proceeded to proffer his open plea of guilty.
Several days following the plea, [Appellee] contacted [Attorney Kelsey] in order to request that a [m]otion to [w]ithdraw [his g]uilty [p]lea be filed. [Attorney Kelsey] acknowledged that [Appellee] had requested to withdraw his plea. [Attorney Kelsey] reminded [Appellee] of the colloquy conducted in court with [the trial court]. [Attorney Kelsey] indicated to [Appellee] that he would not be permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty. Therefore, no [m]otion to [w]ithdraw [the guilty p]lea was filed.
Following Megan's Law litigation, [Appellee] was directed to appear for sentencing. At [Appellee]'s sentencing date, he requested permission to withdraw his plea of guilty. [The trial court] afforded the Commonwealth time to discern whether it would suffer prejudice as a result of [Appellee]'s withdrawal of this plea. On June 27, 2011, [the trial court] conducted a hearing. For multiple reasons, [the trial court] determined that [Appellee] should not have been permitted to withdraw his plea of guilty. [The trial court] therefore denied [Appellee]'s request to withdraw his plea.

PCRA Court Opinion, 6/25/13, at 2-4.

On July 13, 2011, the trial court sentenced Appellee to 18 to 72 months' imprisonment. Appellee filed a timely notice of appeal, and this Court affirmed the judgment of sentence on July 31, 2012. Commonwealth v. Landrau-Melendez, 55 A.3d 152 (Pa.Super. 2012) (unpublished memorandum). Appellee did not file a petition for allowance of appeal with our Supreme Court.

On October 12, 2012, Appellee filed a timely counseled PCRA petition. The Commonwealth filed its answer on December 3, 2012. The PCRA court conducted a hearing on April 8, 2013. On April 9, 2013, the PCRA court entered an order granting Appellee's petition and ordering a new ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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