J-A30026-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
JOSEPH F. RAYNOCK, JR.
Appellant No. 3279 EDA 2013
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence November 1, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-09-SA-0000676-2013
BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., MUNDY, J., and PLATT, J.*
JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUNDY, J.: FILED OCTOBER 06, 2014
Appellant, Joseph F. Raynock, Jr., appeals pro se from the November
1, 2013 judgment of sentence of a $300.00 fine, imposed after he was found
guilty of one count of violations of rules regarding conduct on
Commonwealth property.1 After careful review, we affirm.
On December 2, 2013, the trial court entered an order directing
Appellant to file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal
pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b), within 21
____________________________________________
*
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
1
18 Pa.C.S.A. § 7506(a).
J-A30026-14
on December 23, 2013. Appellant filed his Rule 1925(b) statement on
December 30, 2013.2
By its plain text, Rule 1925(b) [a]ppellant [to] file of
any issue not properly included in the Statement timely filed and served
Id. at 1925(b)(3)(iv).
Our Supreme Court has held that Rule 1925(b) is a bright-line rule.
Commonwealth v. Hill, 16 A.3d 484, 494 (Pa. 2011).
Rule 1925(b) statement no later than December 23, 2013. Appellant filed
statement was filed a week late, following ou
3
in Hill See id.
____________________________________________
2
In addition to being stamped as filed on December 30, 2013 in the trial
court, we also note that Appella
December 30, 2013.
3
be required to find waiver. In his brief, Appellant raises two separate issues.
First, Appellant argues that he did not receive notice of his summary trial
docketing of the notice he was sent did not comply with Pennsylvania Rule of
Criminal Procedure 114. Id. at 19. Neither of these issues were raised in
his Rule 1925(b) statement. Therefore, we would deem these issues
waived. See Hill, supra; accord Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)(4)(vii) (stating,
(Footnote Continued Next Page)
-2-
J-A30026-14
are waived for failure to timely file his Rule 1925(b) statement. Accordingly,
the t
Judgment of sentence affirmed. Case stricken from argument list.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 10/6/2014
_______________________
(Footnote Continued)
[i]ssues not included in the Statement and/or not raised in accordance with
the provisions of [Rule 1925](b)(4) are waived
-3-