J-S20014-17
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
v.
PETER VAN
Appellant No. 3030 EDA 2016
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence August 2, 2016
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Criminal Division at No(s): MC-51-CR-0034054-2014
BEFORE: BOWES, J., OTT, J., AND FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY BOWES, J.: FILED MAY 23, 2017
Peter Van appeals from the August 2, 2016 judgment of sentence
imposed by the Municipal Court of Philadelphia. He challenges the denial of
both his pre-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea and the September
7, 2016 denial of his post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
Since exclusive jurisdiction over this matter lies in the Court of Common
Pleas of Philadelphia, we transfer this action to that court for disposition.
On October 4 2014, Appellant was arrested by Philadelphia Police and
charged with possession of a controlled substance, possession with intent to
deliver (“PWID”), and conspiracy. On December 23, 2014, he pled nolo
contendere to PWID and conspiracy in the Municipal Court in Philadelphia in
J-S20014-17
exchange for admission to an intensive outpatient drug treatment program
under the supervision of the Philadelphia Drug Treatment Court.1
During his five months in the program, Appellant was non-compliant
with its conditions and sanctioned multiple times. Consequently, he retained
counsel and filed a motion to withdraw his plea.2 Following a hearing, the
court denied the motion on November 12, 2015.
Although Appellant was given the option to remain in the program, he
elected to proceed to a hearing on his termination. Prior to termination, he
was sanctioned for additional violations. On May 26, 2016, Appellant waived
a rule to show cause hearing on his program compliance and the trial court
revoked his participation in the treatment program. After receipt of a
presentence investigation report, the court sentenced Appellant on August 2,
2016, to two terms of sixty days to twelve months imprisonment to run
concurrently, followed by two concurrent twelve month periods of reporting
probation. That same day, Appellant filed a post-sentence motion seeking to
withdraw his nolo contendere plea, which was denied on September 7, 2016.
Appellant filed the present appeal to this Court.
____________________________________________
1
Successful completion of the program would have resulted in dismissal of
the charges.
2
He alleged that his plea was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary, and
further that he was innocent of the possession with intent to deliver charge.
-2-
J-S20014-17
The Commonwealth asserts, and we agree, that this appeal should be
transferred to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County as the
latter court has exclusive jurisdiction of appeals from judgments rendered in
the Municipal Court pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 932 (“Except as otherwise
prescribed by any general rule adopted pursuant to section 503 (relating to
reassignment of matters), each court of common pleas shall have exclusive
jurisdiction of appeals from final orders of the minor judiciary established
within the judicial district”); see also Pa.R.Crim.P. 1007(D) (governing
challenges to guilty pleas in the Philadelphia Municipal Court and requiring
judges to inform defendants of their right to appeal to the court of common
pleas within thirty days of entry of a final order denying the motion).
Since the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia has exclusive
jurisdiction of the within appeal, we transfer this matter, together with the
record, to that tribunal in accordance with 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103 (authorizing
transfer of an erroneously filed appeal to the proper tribunal “where it shall
be treated as if originally filed in the transferee court . . . on the date when
first filed”).
Case transferred to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.
Jurisdiction relinquished.
-3-
J-S20014-17
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 5/23/2017
-4-