J-A05026-20
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
v. :
:
:
BARRY J. MESLER, :
:
Appellant : No. 1055 WDA 2019
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 25, 2019
in the Court of Common Pleas of Potter County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-53-SA-0000003-2019
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., BOWES, J., and PELLEGRINI, J.*
MEMORANDUM BY BOWES, J.: FILED JANUARY 31, 2020
Barry J. Mesler appeals from the judgment of sentence of a fine of $500
imposed after he was found guilty of abandoning vehicles.1 We dismiss this
appeal.
At trial, the Commonwealth presented evidence that Appellant placed
junk vehicles on the lot of Charles Counts, an adjacent landowner, and refused
to remove them despite notice to do so from the neighbor and authorities.
Appellant proceeded on the defense that he had acquired the lot in question
by adverse possession, but did not testify or otherwise support his claim with
evidence. The trial court found Appellant guilty and sentenced him in
____________________________________________
1 See 75 Pa.C.S. § 3712(b) (“No person shall abandon a vehicle upon any
public or private property without the express or implied consent of the owner
or person in lawful possession or control of the property.”).
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A05026-20
accordance with 75 Pa.C.S. § 3712(c)(1) (mandating sentence of “a fine of
$500 plus all costs of disposing of the vehicle” for a first-time offender).
Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellant’s one-page brief
states the following:
1. Defendant did not waive a JURY TRIAL.
2. Judge Minor used a PROXY.
3. Chief Phelps upon cross stated first time he talked to the
defendant the defendant was mowing the grass on the property
in the complaint also all the photoes [sic] as entered clearly show
the grass had been mowed proving nothing was abandoned also
proves the defendant[’]s attempt to quiet [M]r[.] Counts[’s] title.
Therefore the defendant request to set aside the verdict or
grant a new trial.
Appellant’s brief at 1 (unnecessary capitalization omitted).
“[A]lthough this Court is willing to construe liberally materials filed by a
pro se litigant, a pro se appellant enjoys no special benefit.” Commonwealth
v. Tchirkow, 160 A.3d 798, 804 (Pa.Super. 2017). “[A] pro se litigant must
comply with the procedural rules set forth in the Pennsylvania Rules of the
Court.” Commonwealth v. Freeland, 106 A.3d 768, 776 (Pa. Super. 2014)
(internal quotation marks omitted). “Any layperson choosing to represent
himself in a legal proceeding must, to some reasonable extent, assume the
risk that his lack of expertise and legal training will prove his undoing.”
Commonwealth v. Gray, 608 A.2d 534, 550 (Pa. Super. 1992) (cleaned up).
Appellant’s brief does not contain a statement of questions presented as
required by Pa.R.A.P. 2111(a)(4). His brief also is in violation of Pa.R.A.P.
-2-
J-A05026-20
2111(a)(1) (requiring a statement of jurisdiction); Pa.R.A.P. 2111(a)(3)
(requiring a statement of the scope and standard of review); Pa.R.A.P.
2111(a)(6) (requiring a summary of argument); and Pa.R.A.P. 2111(a)(8)
(requiring an argument section). The brief further is devoid of citations to the
record or to any legal authority as are required by Pa.R.A.P. 2119(c) and (b),
respectively.
Appellant’s complete disregard for the Rules of Appellate Procedure has
left this Court unable to conduct meaningful review. See, e.g.,
Commonwealth v. Sanford, 445 A.2d 149, 151 (Pa. Super. 1982) (declining
to address merits of appeal because the brief was “so defective as to preclude
effective, appellate review”). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal without
considering its merits. See Pa.R.A.P. 1911(d) (“If the appellant fails to take
the action required by these rules and the Pennsylvania Rules of Judicial
Administration for the preparation of the transcript, the appellate court may
take such action as it deems appropriate, which may include dismissal of the
appeal.”); Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (“[I]f the defects are in the brief or reproduced
record of the appellant and are substantial, the appeal or other matter may
be . . . dismissed.”).
Appeal dismissed.
-3-
J-A05026-20
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 1/31/2020
-4-