J-S01010-15
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
CLIFFORD ANTHONY WILSON,
Appellant No. 422 WDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered on August 15, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0002854-2012
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P. J., JENKINS, J., and MUSMANNO, J.
DISSENTING STATEMENT BY JENKINS, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 23, 2015
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision to vacate Clifford
Wilson’s sentence and remand for re-sentencing. In my view, his sentence
is legal, and there is no Alleyne1 error.
The majority remands for re-sentencing based on its conclusion that
the trial court imposed a mandatory minimum sentence under 42 Pa.C.S. §
9712 in violation of Alleyne. My review of the record indicates that the trial
court did not invoke section 9712 or sentence Wilson to a mandatory
minimum. The trial court states in its opinion that it did not verbally
mention section 9712 at sentencing or apply it in Wilson’s sentence. Trial
Court Opinion, pp. 11-12 (citing N.T., 8/15/13, pp. 4, 7-12). Nor does the
____________________________________________
1
Alleyne v. United States, -- U.S. --, 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013).
J-S01010-15
judgment of sentence refer to section 9712 or suggest that Wilson received
a mandatory minimum sentence. The only references to the mandatory
minimum are handwritten notations (“five years” and “section 9712”) in the
sentencing guidelines forms. The trial court did not sign these forms; they
are merely stamped, at the bottom, “by the court”.2 The guidelines forms
are mere reporting devices to the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing.
They do not replace or supplement the judgment of sentence, which, as
stated above, does not refer to the mandatory minimum.
The notations in the sentencing guideline forms appear to be mere
clerical errors which the trial court can correct at any time.
Commonwealth v. Baio, 898 A.2d 1095, 1099 (Pa.Super.2004) (court has
inherent powers to amend its records, to correct mistakes of the clerk or
other officer of the court, inadvertencies of counsel, or supply defects or
omissions in the record, even after lapse of 30 day term for modification of
orders). I respectfully submit that a simple order amending the guideline
forms to eliminate the handwritten notations is the proper remedy instead of
a new sentencing hearing.
____________________________________________
2
Further, the guidelines form for Wilson’s robbery conviction lists the wrong
subsection of the robbery statute. Wilson was sentenced under 18 Pa.C.S. §
3701(a)(1)(ii) (robbery by “threaten[ing] another with or intentionally
put[ting] him in fear of immediate serious bodily injury”). The guidelines
form states erroneously that he was sentenced under section 3701(a)(1)(i)
(robbery by “inflict[ing] serious bodily injury upon another”).
-2-