J-S32002-15
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
RAYMONT WALKER,
Appellant No. 2019 WDA 2013
Appeal from the Order Entered November 25, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0006204-2007
BEFORE: SHOGAN, OLSON, and MUSMANNO, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY SHOGAN, J.: FILED APRIL 15, 2016
This matter is before this panel after remand from the Supreme Court
of Pennsylvania. On February 24, 2016, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court
granted the petition for allowance of appeal filed by Appellant, Raymont
Walker, vacated this Court’s July 24, 2015 order affirming the dismissal of
Appellant’s petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”),
42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546, and remanded the case to our Court for further
proceedings consistent with the United States Supreme Court’s decision in
Montgomery v. Louisiana, __ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2016). After
careful review, we reverse the PCRA court’s order dismissing Appellant’s
PCRA petition, vacate Appellant’s judgment of sentence, and remand for
resentencing.
J-S32002-15
Appellant was convicted by a jury of one count each of first-degree
murder, criminal attempt (homicide), possession of a firearm by a minor,
criminal conspiracy, and two counts of aggravated assault. Appellant was
fifteen years old at the time he committed the crimes. The trial court
imposed a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of
parole for first-degree murder, a consecutive prison term of ten to twenty
years for criminal attempt (homicide), and a consecutive prison term of
thirty to sixty months for aggravated assault. The trial court imposed no
further sentence for the remaining convictions. This Court affirmed the
judgment of sentence on April 30, 2012. Commonwealth v. Walker, 1667
WDA 2010, 48 A.3d 490 (Pa. Super. 2012) (unpublished memorandum).
Appellant filed a timely pro se PCRA petition on July 30, 2012, alleging,
inter alia, that he was entitled to relief pursuant to the United States
Supreme Court’s decision in Miller v. Alabama, __ U.S. __, 132 S.Ct. 2455
(2012), which held that mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders were
unconstitutional. Appointed counsel filed an amended petition on January 7,
2013. The PCRA court held a hearing on May 31, 2013, and denied the
petition for post-conviction relief on November 25, 2013. Appellant filed a
timely notice of appeal to this Court on December 20, 2013, and we affirmed
the dismissal of the PCRA petition on July 24, 2015. Commonwealth v.
Walker, 2019 WDA 2013, 125 A.3d 460 (Pa. Super. filed July 24, 2015)
(unpublished memorandum).
-2-
J-S32002-15
Appellant filed a petition for allowance of appeal with our Supreme
Court on July 29, 2015. While that petition was pending, the United States
Supreme Court filed its opinion in Montgomery on January 25, 2016. In
Montgomery, the United States Supreme Court held that Miller’s
prohibition of mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole for
juvenile offenders was a new substantive rule that must be applied
retroactively in cases on collateral review in state courts. Montgomery,
136 S.Ct. at 732. Accordingly, on February 24, 2016, the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court granted Appellant’s petition for allowance of appeal, vacated
our July 24, 2015 decision, and remanded the appeal from the denial of
PCRA relief to this Court. Commonwealth v. Walker, 299 WAL 2015 (Pa.
filed February 24, 2016).
We conclude that Appellant is entitled to resentencing in light of
Miller, Montgomery, and Commonwealth v. Secreti, ___ A.3d ___, 2016
PA Super 28 (Pa. Super. 2016) (holding Miller is retroactive for purposes of
collateral review as of its filing date of June 25, 2012, and the appellant was
entitled to a new sentencing hearing in accordance with the dictates of our
Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Batts, 66 A.3d 286 (Pa.
2013)). Thus, we reverse the PCRA court’s November 25, 2013 order
dismissing Appellant’s PCRA petition, vacate Appellant’s judgment of
sentence, and remand for resentencing in accordance with Miller and Batts.
-3-
J-S32002-15
On remand, the trial court shall, at a minimum, take into consideration the
following factors:
[Appellant’s] age at the time of the offense, his diminished
culpability and capacity for change, the circumstances of the
crime, the extent of his participation in the crime, his family,
home and neighborhood environment, his emotional maturity
and development, the extent that familial and/or peer pressure
may have affected him, his past exposure to violence, his drug
and alcohol history, his ability to deal with the police, his
capacity to assist his attorney, his mental health history, and his
potential for rehabilitation.
Batts, 66 A.3d at 297 (quotation marks and citation omitted).
Order reversed. Judgment of sentence vacated. Case remanded for
resentencing. Jurisdiction relinquished.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 4/15/2016
-4-