J-A21029-15
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
RAUL COLON
Appellant No. 3613 EDA 2014
Appeal from the PCRA Order November 24, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0202931-2003
BEFORE: ALLEN, J., MUNDY, J., and FITZGERALD, J.*
JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUNDY, J.: FILED JULY 15, 2015
Appellant, Raul Colon, appeals pro se from the November 24, 2014
order dismissing, as untimely, his third petition for relief filed pursuant to
the Post Conviction Relief Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. After careful
review, we affirm.
On June 25, 2003, the trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 20
to 40 years’ imprisonment, after Appellant pled guilty to two counts of
attempted murder, and one count of carrying a firearm without a license. 1
Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, but later withdrew said appeal on
September 12, 2003. As a result, Appellant’s judgment of sentence became
____________________________________________
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
1
18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 901(a) and 6106(a)(1), respectively.
J-A21029-15
final on that same day. See generally 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9545(b)(3).
Therefore, Appellant had until September 12, 2004 to timely file a PCRA
petition.2 See generally id. § 9545(b)(1). Appellant filed the instant
petition on June 29, 2012. Consequently, it was patently untimely.
Moreover, we have reviewed Appellant’s brief, and therein, Appellant
does not explicitly argue that one of the three enumerated time-bar
exceptions applies. To the extent Appellant’s brief could be construed as
arguing that the United States Supreme Court’s decisions in Missouri v.
Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (2012), and Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376
(2012), satisfy the new constitutional right exception to the PCRA time-bar,
this Court has rejected those arguments. Commonwealth v. Feliciano, 69
A.3d 1270, 1277 (Pa. Super. 2013). Therefore, the PCRA court was without
jurisdiction to address the merits of Appellant’s petition.
Based on the foregoing, we conclude the PCRA court properly
dismissed Appellant’s PCRA petition as untimely filed. Accordingly, the PCRA
court’s November 24, 2014 order is affirmed.
Order affirmed.
____________________________________________
2
Appellant timely filed his first PCRA petition on February 19, 2004, which
the PCRA court denied on April 12, 2005. This Court affirmed that order on
February 1, 2007. Commonwealth v. Colon, 919 A.2d 969 (Pa. Super.
2007) (unpublished memorandum). Appellant did not file a petition for
allowance of appeal in our Supreme Court. Appellant filed his second PCRA
petition on May 27, 2009, and the PCRA court dismissed the same, as
untimely, on January 8, 2010. Appellant did not file a notice of appeal to
this Court.
-2-
J-A21029-15
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 7/15/2015
-3-