J-S34008-16
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
ANDREW JAMES CALLAHAN
Appellant No. 1934 MDA 2015
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence October 21, 2015
In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-06-SA-0000210-2015
BEFORE: PANELLA, J., STABILE, J., and JENKINS, J.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY PANELLA, J. FILED JUNE 14, 2016
Appellant, Andrew James Callahan, appeals pro se from the judgment
of sentence entered October 21, 2015, following his conviction of
Harassment, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 2709(a)(2). After review, we quash Appellant’s
appeal.
Appellant has submitted to the Court a half-page letter (consisting of
eight sentences) in lieu of a formal argument brief. The Pennsylvania Rules
of Appellate Procedure provide the following guidelines regarding the content
of an appellant’s brief:
Rule 2111. Brief of the Appellant
(a)General Rule. The brief of the appellant, except as
otherwise prescribed by these rules, shall consist of the following
matters, separately and distinctly and in the following order:
(1) Statement of jurisdiction.
(2) Order or other determination in question.
J-S34008-16
(3) Statement of both the scope of review and the
standard of review.
(4) Statement of the questions involved.
(5) Statement of the case.
(6) Summary of argument.
(7) Statement of the reasons to allow an appeal to
challenge the discretionary aspects of sentence, if
applicable.
(8) Argument for appellant.
(9) A short conclusion stating the precise relief sought.
(10) The opinions and pleadings specified in Subdivisions
(b) and (c) of this rule.
(11) In the Superior Court, a copy of the statement of
errors complained of on appeal, filed with the trial court
pursuant to Rule 1925(b), or an averment that no order
requiring a statement of errors complained of on appeal
pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) was entered.
(b) Opinions below.—There shall be appended to the brief a
copy of any opinions delivered by any court or other government
unit below relating to the order or other determination under
review, if pertinent to the questions involved. If an opinion has
been reported, that fact and the appropriate citation shall also
be set forth.
Pa.R.A.P. 2111.
Appellant’s “brief” contains no citation to legal authority and raises no
issues for our review. Although Appellant has appended to his brief a copy of
the trial court’s Rule 1925(a) opinion, he fails to meet any other requirement
specified in Rule 2111. Appellant’s brief amounts to little more than a
general denial of the conduct underlying his summary harassment conviction
-2-
J-S34008-16
without meaningful argument and flagrantly ignores our Rules of Appellate
Procedure.
It is patently obvious that Appellant has failed to provide this Court
with a proper appellate brief, rendering us incapable of conducting
meaningful judicial review. While we are not insensitive to the fact Appellant
is proceeding pro se, we decline to become his counsel. “When issues are
not properly raised and developed in briefs, when the briefs are wholly
inadequate to present specific issues for review, a court will not consider the
merits thereof.” Commonwealth v. Miller, 721 A.2d 1121, 1124 (Pa.
Super. 1998) (citations omitted). Further, although this Court is “willing to
liberally construe materials filed by a pro se litigant, pro se status confers no
special benefit upon the appellant.” Commonwealth v. Adams, 882 A.2d
496, 498 (Pa. Super. 2005).
Appeal Quashed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 6/14/2016
-3-