J-S54005-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
TIMOTHY JON SANTERSERO
Appellant No. 378 MDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence November 27, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-40-CR-0000457-2013
BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., MUNDY, J., and STABILE, J.
MEMORANDUM BY LAZARUS, J.: FILED AUGUST 28, 2014
Timothy Jon Santersero appeals from his judgment of sentence
imposed on November 22, 2013 in the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne
County after he pled guilty to ten counts of possession of child pornography.1
Counsel has petitioned this Court to withdraw his representation of
Santersero pursuant to Anders, McClendon and Santiago.2 Upon review,
we remand for the filing of a proper Anders brief.
____________________________________________
1
18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6312(d)(1). Santersero was prosecuted under an earlier
version of the statute. Subsection (d)(1) was, in substance, replaced by
section 6312(d). See Act 2013-105 (H.B. 321), P.L. 1163, § 2, approved
Dec. 18, 2013, eff. Jan. 1, 2014.
2
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Commonwealth v.
McClendon, 434 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 1981); and Commonwealth v. Santiago,
978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009).
J-S54005-14
In order to withdraw pursuant to Anders and McClendon, counsel
must: 1) petition the Court for leave to withdraw, certifying that after a
thorough review of the record, counsel has concluded the issues to be raised
are wholly frivolous; 2) file a brief referring to anything in the record that
might arguably support an appeal; and 3) furnish a copy of the brief to the
appellant and advise him of his right to obtain new counsel or file a pro se
brief to raise any additional points that the appellant deems worthy of
review. Commonwealth v. Hernandez, 783 A.2d 784, 786 (Pa. Super.
2001). In Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009), the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that, in order to withdraw under Anders,
counsel must also
frivolous.
the record and concluded the appeal is wholly frivolous. Counsel indicates
that he supplied Santersero with a copy of the brief and a letter explaining
pro se,3 or with newly-retained counsel, and to
raise any other issues he believes might have merit. Counsel also has
submitted a brief, setting out in neutral form a single issue of arguable
merit. However, counsel has failed to explain, pursuant to the dictates of
____________________________________________
3
Santersero has not submitted any additional or supplemental filings to this
Court. Additionally, the Commonwealth has indicated that it will not be filing
a brief in this matter.
-2-
J-S54005-14
Santiago, why he believes the issue to be frivolous. Thus, counsel has not
complied with the requirements of Santiago and his motion to withdraw
cannot be granted.
Accordingly, counsel is directed to submit a proper brief pursuant to
the dictates of Anders, McClendon and Santiago or, in the alternative, to
Panel jurisdiction retained.
-3-