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.

Commonwealth v. Dixon

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

May 1, 2017

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
WILLIE FRANK DIXON, II Appellant

         Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence July 25, 2016 In the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-28-CR-0001698-2014

          BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., BENDER, P.J.E. and STEVENS, P.J.E. [*]

          OPINION

          STEVENS, P.J.E.

         Willie Frank Dixon, II, ("Appellant") appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin County after he pled guilty to one count of rape by forcible compulsion of a female under 16 years old. Sentenced to a term of incarceration of three and one-half to seven years, Appellant contends that the court's refusal to credit him with time served on pretrial home confinement with electronic monitoring rendered his sentence illegal. We affirm.

         On August 25, 2014, 31 year-old Appellant was charged with rape by forcible compulsion, statutory sexual assault, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse person less than 16 years of age, indecent assault, and corrupting the morals of a minor[1] in connection with his assault of a female under sixteen years of age. On April 27, 2016, Appellant entered a negotiated plea of nolo contendere to the charge of rape, and, on July 25, 2016, the trial court imposed the above-cited sentence pursuant to the plea agreement.

         During sentencing, defense counsel notified the court that Appellant sought credit for the approximately ten months he served on court-ordered pretrial home confinement with electronic monitoring. N.T. 7/25/16 at 10. The court advised Appellant to discuss the issue further with counsel and if he still wished to make the request he should do so in a post-sentence motion. N.T. at 11. On August 4, 2016, Appellant raised the issue in his counseled post-sentence motion, but the court denied the motion in its order of August 29, 2016. This timely appeal followed.

Appellant presents one issue for our consideration:
SHOULD [APPELLANT] BE GIVEN CREDIT TOWARDS THE TERM OF HIS SENTENCE FOR TIME SERVED ON HOME DETENTION?

Appellant's brief at 5.

         Our standard of review following a plea of guilty is well-settled. "A plea of guilty constitutes a waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects and defenses" and "waives the right to challenge anything but the legality of [the] sentence and the validity of [the] plea." Commonwealth v. Jones, 593 Pa. 295, 929 A.2d 205, 212 (2007) (citation omitted).

         A claim based upon the failure to give credit for time served is a challenge implicating the legality of one's sentence. Commonwealth v. Tobin, 89 A.3d 663, 669 (Pa.Super. 2014). "A claim challenging the legality of sentence is appealable as of right." Commonwealth v. Hollawell, 604 A.2d 723, 725 (Pa.Super. 1992); Commonwealth v. Clark, 885 A.2d 1030, 1032 (Pa.Super. 2005).

         Our scope and standard of review for illegal sentence claims is as follows:

The scope and standard of review applied to determine the legality of a sentence are well established. If no statutory authorization exists for a particular sentence, that sentence is illegal and subject to correction. An illegal sentence must be vacated. In evaluating a trial court's application of a statute, our standard of review is plenary and is limited to determining whether the trial court committed an error of law.

Commonwealth v. Leverette, 911 A.2d 998, 1001-02 (Pa.Super. 2006) (internal citations omitted). An issue seeking credit "for time spent on bail release subject to electronic home monitoring is primarily one of statutory construction." Commonwealt ...


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.