Com. v. Halgash, P. ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • J-S55026-17
    NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
    COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA                       IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
    PENNSYLVANIA
    v.
    PATRICIA HALGASH
    Appellant                   No. 1874 MDA 2016
    Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence October 20, 2016
    in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County
    Criminal Division at No(s): CP-36-CR-0004545-2015
    BEFORE: DUBOW, RANSOM, and STRASSBURGER, JJ.*
    JUDGMENT ORDER BY RANSOM, J.:                           FILED OCTOBER 02, 2017
    Appellant, Patricia Halgash, appeals from the judgment of sentence of
    four years and three days to fifteen years of incarceration, imposed October
    20, 2016, following a jury trial resulting in her convictions for homicide by
    vehicle, homicide by vehicle while driving under the influence, aggravated
    assault by vehicle, aggravated assault by vehicle while driving under the
    influence,    DUI    –    general   impairment,   DUI    –   controlled   substance-
    combination of alcohol and drugs, and disregarding traffic lanes.1 We affirm.
    On July 14, 2016, a jury convicted Appellant of the aforementioned
    charges.      On October 20, 2016, she appeared for sentencing and was
    ____________________________________________
    *
    Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
    1
    See 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 3732(a), 3735(a), 3732.1(a), 3735.1(a), 3802(a)(1),
    3802(d)(3), and 3309(1), respectively.
    J-S55026-17
    sentenced to four years and three days to fifteen years of incarceration.2
    Appellant timely appealed and, on November 23, 2016, the court ordered
    her to file a concise statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to
    Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). Appellant did not file a statement. In its memorandum
    opinion filed pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a), the court stated:
    Defendant has failed to file and serve a statement of matters
    complained of on appeal as directed in my Pa.R.A.P. 1925 Order
    dated November 23, 2016.
    Accordingly, it is requested that the Court dismiss Defendant’s
    Appeal.
    See Trial Court Opinion (TCO), 12/21/16, at 1.
    Where a trial court orders an Appellant to file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)
    statement, the Appellant must comply in a timely manner. Commonwealth
    v. Castillo, 
    888 A.2d 775
    , 780 (Pa. 2005). Failure to comply with a Rule
    1925(b) order will result in waiver of all issues raised on appeal. Id.; see
    also Greater Erie Indus. Development Corp. v. Presque Isle Downs,
    Inc., 
    88 A.3d 222
    , 225 (Pa. Super. 2014); Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)(4)(vii)
    (“Issues not included in the Statement and/or not raised in accordance with
    the provision of this paragraph (b)(4) are waived.”). The record reflects that
    the trial court issued an order requiring Appellant to submit a Rule 1925(b)
    statement and that Appellant failed to file such a statement within twenty-
    ____________________________________________
    2
    The sentencing notes are not included in the certified record, but as
    Appellant does not challenge her sentence, we have not requested them.
    -2-
    J-S55026-17
    one days of the date of that order. Appellant has not attempted to explain
    her failure to file a statement nor even mentioned this failure in her brief.
    Thus, due to Appellant’s failure to submit a Rule 1925(b) statement, we
    conclude that any issues she wished to raise have been waived.
    Appellant’s counsel has filed a reply brief in which he asserts that he
    never received the Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) order due to the fact that it was sent
    to the wrong address. See Reply Brief at 5. Counsel argues that Appellant
    should not be punished for an administrative error of the judicial system.
    
    Id.
     We do not accept this explanation as plausible or excusable.
    Initially, we note that the docket reflects that the Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b)
    order was issued November 23, 2016. The order itself reflects that a copy
    was   sent   to   counsel   at   1500   JFK   Blvd.,   Suite   900,   Philadelphia,
    Pennsylvania, 19102, which counsel avers was the wrong address.              While
    Appellant claims that the court did not update the docket to reflect his
    correct address, it is counsel’s responsibility to ensure his address is correct
    and up to date.     See Pa.R.Crim.P. 120; see also L.C.R.Crim.P. No. 120
    (noting that the entry of appearance must include the attorney’s address,
    phone number, attorney ID number, and email address).                 Further, the
    court’s Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion, with that same order attached, was
    served upon counsel by electronic service on December 21, 2016. Counsel
    does not address this service, nor does he explain why, since he was served
    with the court’s opinion and order on December 21, 2016, his May 17, 2017
    brief does not acknowledge the waiver. If counsel truly was unaware of the
    -3-
    J-S55026-17
    issuance of the order until receipt of the electronic filing, he could have
    acknowledged the waiver in his brief and requested that this Court remand
    the matter for the filing of a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement.
    The   failure   to   file   a   Pa.R.A.P.   1925(b)   statement   is   per   se
    ineffectiveness. See Commonwealth v. Thompson, 
    39 A.3d 335
    , 339-40
    (Pa. Super. 2012); see also Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(3). Accordingly, Appellant is
    free to file a petition pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42
    Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546, while she has the opportunity to do so.
    Judgment of sentence affirmed. Jurisdiction relinquished.
    Judgment Entered.
    Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
    Prothonotary
    Date: 10/2/2017
    -4-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 1874 MDA 2016

Filed Date: 10/2/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/13/2024