Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Patrick Vanderpool
Mr. Abrams/Mr. Lemasters, John Does and Jane Does to be named Appeal of: Patrick Vanderpool
Submitted February 3, 2017
Vanderpool (Vanderpool) appeals, pro se, from the Greene
County Common Pleas Court's (trial court) August 6, 2015
order granting the motion of the Commonwealth's Office of
General Counsel on behalf of Progress Community Corrections
Center (PCCC) Director(s) M. Gary Abrams and/or David
Lemasters, John Doe and Jane Doe (hereinafter, Commonwealth)
to dismiss Vanderpool's Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus (Petition). Essentially, the issues for this
Court's review are: (1) whether Vanderpool's appeal
was timely, and (2) whether the trial court violated
Vanderpool's due process rights by denying the Petition
without a hearing. Upon review, we dismiss Vanderpool's
appeal as untimely.
is a sex-offender parolee housed at PCCC in Waynesburg,
Greene County, Pennsylvania. PCCC is a secure community
corrections facility located adjacent to the State
Correctional Institution at Greene (SCI-Greene). On or about
April 2, 2015, Vanderpool and 21 other similarly-situated
parolees (Petitioners) filed nearly identical petitions, in
which they claimed that, despite having been paroled from
their respective correctional institutions, they are still
effectively incarcerated at PCCC. On April 20, 2015, the
Commonwealth filed a motion to consolidate the 22 cases,
which Vanderpool opposed. The trial court granted the
Commonwealth's motion and consolidated the cases on May
12, 2015. On May 18, 2015, the trial court ordered the
Commonwealth to respond to the 22 petitions.
6, 2015 motion to dismiss the petitions without a hearing
(Motion), the Commonwealth stated that "the writ [of
habeas corpus] may be used only to extricate a
petitioner from illegal confinement or to secure relief from
conditions of confinement that constitute cruel and unusual
punishment. [Commonwealth ex rel. Fortune v.]
Dragovich[, 792 A.2d 1257 (Pa. Super.
2002)]."Motion at 7. Specifically, the Commonwealth
The . . . Petitioners were unable to secure an appropriate
home plan prior to release from their respective state
correctional institutions. However, the Petitioners were
paroled . . . to [PCCC] in order to afford them an
opportunity to maintain sexual offender counseling. This
transition serves as an intermediate step prior to their
release into the community, once a submitted home plan is
. . . .
[T]he alternative to paroling the Petitioners . . . to [PCCC]
would be to deny their parole until such time as they either
obtain an approved home plan or their sentence expires.
Motion at 9-10. By July 28, 2015 order, docketed August 6,
2015, the trial court granted the Commonwealth's Motion.
September 10, 2015, Vanderpool appealed from the trial
court's order. Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure
(Pa.R.A.P.) 903(a) requires that an appeal from a trial
court's order "shall be filed within 30 days after
the entry of the order from which the appeal is taken."
Pa.R.A.P. 105(b) also prohibits this Court from
"enlarg[ing] the time for filing a notice of appeal, a
petition for allowance of appeal, a petition for permission
to appeal, or a petition for review." See One Tree
Condominium Ass'n v. Greene, 133 A.3d 113 (Pa.
Cmwlth. 2016); In re Kemmerer, 405 A.2d 1108, 1109
(Pa. Cmwlth. 1979). Accordingly, Vanderpool was required to
file his appeal from the trial court's order by September
8, 2015. Because he did not file his appeal until September
10, 2015, it was untimely and, thus, must be
on the foregoing, Vanderpool's appeal is dismissed as
Cosgrove concurs in the result only.
NOW, this 17th day of May, 2017, we hereby dismiss
as untimely Patrick Vanderpool's appeal from the Greene