Com. v. Phillips, R. ( 2015 )

J-A24046-15
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
v.
RUTH PHILLIPS
Appellant No. 3606 EDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence November 20, 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-23-CR-0006767-2013
BEFORE: PANELLA, J., WECHT, J., and STRASSBURGER, J.*
MEMORANDUM BY PANELLA, J. FILED NOVEMBER 16, 2015
Appellant, Ruth Phillips, appeals from the judgment of sentence
entered after she pled nolo contendere to seven counts of forgery, one count
of theft by unlawful taking, and one count of theft by deception. After
careful review, we affirm.
Phillips did not plead nolo contendere until the Commonwealth had
presented three days of testimony on these charges. The evidence
presented by the Commonwealth at trial revealed that Phillips had been
employed as a bookkeeper for a family business. After several
reassurances, the business owners discovered that Phillips had indeed been
____________________________________________
*
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A24046-15
embezzling money from them. Phillips was eventually charged with theft of
nearly $600,000.
After hearing the evidence put forth by the Commonwealth and
consultation with her attorney, Phillips agreed to plead nolo contendere to
the charges. After a full colloquy, Phillips’s plea was accepted by the trial
court. At sentencing, Phillips did not object to the amount of restitution
claimed by the Commonwealth. The trial court sentenced Phillips to a period
of incarceration of one to two years, to be followed by seven years of
probation.
Thereafter, appellate counsel, who was not trial counsel, filed a post-
sentence motion to withdraw Phillips’s plea. The trial court scheduled a
hearing. Furthermore, appellate counsel filed a motion for extension of bail
during post-sentence proceedings, but the trial court denied the motion.
The scheduled hearing never occurred, as Phillips subsequently filed a
motion to withdraw the post-sentence motion, and concurrently filed a
notice of appeal.1 At the same time, the trial court granted trial counsel’s
petition to withdraw his appearance. Shortly thereafter, Phillips filed with
this Court an emergency application requesting that she be released on bail
pending appeal.
____________________________________________
1
Phillips’s appeal is thus timely pursuant to Commonwealth v. Miller, 715
A.2d 1203 (Pa. Super. 1998).
-2-
J-A24046-15
The trial court ordered Phillips to file a concise statement of issues to
be raised on appeal. Phillips responded with a timely statement raising 54
issues.
In her appellate brief, Phillips has winnowed this staggering number
down to 13. However, the argument section of her brief consists of one
single section, spanning 4½ pages. This rambling argument section fails to
present any cognizable arguments in support of the 13 issues Phillips claims
to be raising. At best, the section presents arguments concerning the
evidence presented by the Commonwealth at trial. However, these
arguments are waived pursuant to Phillips’s plea. See Commonwealth v.
Moser, 999 A.2d 602, 606 (Pa. Super. 2010) (nolo contendere plea is the
functional equivalent of a guilty plea despite the lack of admission of guilt);
Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, 98 A.3d 1268, 1275 (Pa. 2014) (after a
guilty plea, all issues are waived save for jurisdiction, the validity of the
plea, and the legality of the sentence).
Regarding any other issues that may be arguably present in Phillips’s
convoluted appellate brief, “[w]hen 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.”
Branch Banking and Trust v. Gesiorski, 904 A.2d 939, 942-943 (Pa.
Super. 2006). Phillips is due no relief on appeal.
Judgment of sentence affirmed. Jurisdiction relinquished.
-3-
J-A24046-15
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 11/16/2015
-4-