Com. v. Noble, R.

J-S15004-19 & J-S15005-19 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : RICARDO L. NOBLE : : Appellant : No. 1354 WDA 2018 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered January 29, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-25-CR-0000318-1992 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : RICARDO NOBLE : : Appellant : No. 1505 WDA 2018 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered January 29, 2018 In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-25-CR-0000318-1992 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J.E., SHOGAN, J., and COLINS*, J. MEMORANDUM BY COLINS, J.: FILED APRIL 09, 2019 Appellant, Ricardo Noble, pro se, appeals from the judgment of sentence of 40 years to life imprisonment, which was imposed at his resentencing pursuant to his jury trial convictions for murder of the second degree, criminal * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S15004-19 & J-S15005-19 conspiracy, and robbery.1 We quash both appeals as untimely. Additionally, we deny Appellant’s pro se “Motion[s] for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief” at both docket numbers as moot. On July 19, 2017, the trial court granted Appellant relief pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”).2 On January 29, 2018, the trial court resentenced Appellant. No post-sentence motion was filed. On February 20, 2018, Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw, which the trial court did not address. Despite this pending motion, on March 9, 2018, counsel filed a motion to reinstate Appellant’s appeal rights nunc pro tunc, which the trial court granted later that month. On March 22, 2018, counsel filed a notice of appeal, which this Court assigned Docket Number 420 WDA 2018,3 along with a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). On April 10, 2018, counsel filed another motion to withdraw, which was denied by the trial court on April 30, 2018. On May 16, 2018, Appellant filed a motion to represent himself. On May 23, 2018, this Court remanded for a Grazier hearing.4 Following the hearing, on June 15, 2018, the trial court found that Appellant’s request to proceed pro se was knowing, ____________________________________________ 118 Pa.C.S. §§ 2502(b), 903(a)(1), and 3701(a)(1), respectively. Appellant was originally sentenced on September 28, 1992. 2 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541–9546. 3Docket No. 420 WDA 2018 corresponds to Journal No. J-S15003-19, and the 13 issues raised therein are addressed in a separate memorandum decision. 4 Commonwealth v. Grazier, 713 A.2d 81 (Pa. 1998). -2- J-S15004-19 & J-S15005-19 intelligent, and voluntary, and it granted said request. On July 5, 2018, Appellant requested the trial court’s permission to supplement the concise statement of errors complained of on appeal, which the trial court granted on July 16, 2018. Appellant filed a supplemental concise statement of errors on August 8, 2018. On September 19, 2018, Appellant filed two notices of appeal, which were assigned the instant Docket Numbers 1354 WDA 2018 and 1505 WDA 2018.5 When the trial court issues an order reinstating an appellant’s appeal rights, the appellant must file the appeal within 30 days of the order reinstating the appeal rights.3 3 See Pa.R.A.P. 903(a) (Except as otherwise prescribed by this rule, the notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after the entry of the order from which the appeal is taken). Commonwealth v. Wright, 846 A.2d 730, 734-35 (Pa. Super. 2004). In the current action, the trial court issued an order reinstating Appellant’s appeal rights in March 2018; he did not file the notices of appeal for the instant dockets, Docket Numbers 1354 WDA 2018 and 1505 WDA 2018, until September 2018 – about five months late. Appellant’s notices of appeal thus were untimely, and we hence quash both appeals. We deny Appellant’s pro ____________________________________________ 5 Appellant simultaneously filed concise statements, raising issues about the production of documents and his motion for correction to the notes of testimony for his resentencing hearing; these claims were not included in the statement initially filed by counsel on March 22, 2018, or in Appellant’s pro se supplemental statement filed on August 8, 2018. The trial court filed memorandum opinions addressing Appellant’s issues on November 8, 2018, both of which relied in part upon an order it had entered on August 28, 2018. -3- J-S15004-19 & J-S15005-19 se “Motion[s] for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief” at both docket numbers as moot due to these quashals. Appeals quashed. Motions denied. Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 4/9/2019 -4-