J-S10041-15
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
ANGEL COLON
Appellant No. 2098 EDA 2014
Appeal from the PCRA Order June 25, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-15-CR-0002033-2004;
CP-15-CR-0004401-2004
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., STABILE, J., and PLATT, J.*
JUDGMENT ORDER BY GANTMAN, P.J.: FILED MARCH 04, 2015
Appellant, Angel Colon, appeals pro se from the order entered in the
Chester County Court of Common Pleas, dismissing as untimely his serial
petition filed per the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), at 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§
9541-9546. On September 12, 2005, Appellant pled guilty to possession
with intent to deliver (“PWID”), two counts of delivery of a controlled
substance, and corrupt organizations. The court sentenced Appellant on
April 7, 2006, to an aggregate term of twenty to fifty years’ imprisonment.
This Court affirmed the judgment of sentence on May 14, 2007, and our
Supreme Court denied allowance of appeal on November 6, 2008. See
Commonwealth v. Colon, 929 A.2d 236 (Pa.Super. 2007), appeal denied,
599 Pa. 698, 961 A.2d 858 (2008). Appellant filed his first PCRA petition pro
_________________________
*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S10041-15
se on August 3, 2009. The PCRA court appointed counsel, who filed a
Turner/Finley “no merit” letter and petition to withdraw. The PCRA court
issued Rule 907 notice on November 13, 2009, and Appellant filed a pro se
response. On December 17, 2009, the PCRA court granted counsel’s petition
to withdraw, and denied Appellant’s petition, which this Court affirmed. See
Commonwealth v. Colon, 13 A.3d 979 (Pa.Super. 2010). Appellant filed
the current PCRA petition pro se on April 16, 2013. The PCRA court issued
Rule 907 notice on November 26, 2013, to which Appellant responded pro se
on December 17, 2013. The PCRA court subsequently denied Appellant’s
petition on June 25, 2014. Appellant timely filed pro se a notice of appeal
and voluntary Rule 1925(b) statement on July 21, 2014.
The timeliness of a PCRA petition is a jurisdictional requisite.
Commonwealth v. Hackett, 598 Pa. 350, 956 A.2d 978 (2008).
“Jurisdictional time limits go to a court’s right or competency to adjudicate a
controversy.” Id. at 359, 956 A.2d at 983. Under the amended PCRA,
effective 1/16/96, a PCRA petition must be filed within one year of the date
the underlying judgment becomes final. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(1). A
judgment is deemed final “at the conclusion of direct review, including
discretionary review in the Supreme Court of the United States and the
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, or at the expiration of time for seeking
review.” 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(3).
Instantly, Appellant filed his current PCRA petition on April 16, 2013,
-2-
J-S10041-15
more than four years after his judgment of sentence became final on
February 4, 2009. Further, the one-year grace period provided in the
amended PCRA “does not apply to second or subsequent petitions,
regardless of when the first petition was filed.” Commonwealth v.
Fairiror, 809 A.2d 396, 398 (Pa.Super. 2002), appeal denied, 573 Pa. 703,
827 A.2d 429 (2003). Additionally, Appellant’s current PCRA petition fails to
plead and prove any cognizable exception to the statutory timeliness
requirements. See 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(1) (providing three exceptions to
one-year time limit under PCRA). Accordingly, the court properly dismissed
the petition as untimely.
Order affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 3/4/2015
-3-