Com. v. Collins, C. ( 2015 )

J. S76008/14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
v. :
:
CARL LEE COLLINS, : No. 6 WDA 2014
:
Appellant :
Appeal from the PCRA Order, December 5, 2013,
in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County
Criminal Division at Nos. CP-02-CR-0012112-1993,
CP-02-CR-0013464-1993
BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., PANELLA AND OLSON, JJ.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED JANUARY 27, 2015
Appellant appeals from the order denying his latest petition brought
pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541 to
9546. We affirm.
On August 31, 1993, while 16 years of age, appellant shot and killed a
man during a robbery in Pittsburgh. On March 21, 1994, a jury convicted
appellant of second degree murder and related offenses; and on May 17,
1994, appellant was sentenced to an aggregate, mandatory sentence of life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
On May 15, 1996, this court affirmed the judgment of sentence; and
on October 31, 1996, our supreme court denied appeal. Commonwealth v.
Collins, 679 A.2d 843 (Pa.Super. 1996) (unpublished memorandum),
J. S76008/14
appeal denied, 685 A.2d 542 (Pa. 1996). Appellant has previously pursued
multiple, unsuccessful PCRA petitions.
Appellant filed the instant, untimely PCRA petition on July 10, 2012,
within 60 days of the United States Supreme Court’s June 25, 2012 decision
in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012), which held that it is
unconstitutional to sentence individuals who were under 18 years of age at
the time of their offense to mandatory life imprisonment without parole.
Appellant’s petition invoked the after-recognized constitutional right
exception to the time restrictions of the PCRA. See 42 Pa.C.S.A.
§ 9545(b)(1)(iii).
We do not have jurisdiction to review appellant’s petition because
Section 9545(b)(1)(iii) requires that the newly recognized right be already
held to apply retroactively. Commonwealth v. Seskey, 86 A.3d 237, 242-
243 (Pa.Super. 2014), appeal denied, 101 A.3d 103 (Pa. 2014). Miller v.
Alabama has not been held to apply retroactively. Moreover, our supreme
court has ruled that Miller v. Alabama would not be applied retroactively to
persons on collateral review. Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 81 A.3d 1(Pa. 2013). In his present appeal, appellant argues that Cunningham was
wrongly decided. However, as a subordinate court we are unable to reverse
the rulings of our supreme court. Consequently, we are bound by
Cunningham, and are without jurisdiction to review appellant’s petition.
Order affirmed.
-2-
J. S76008/14
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 1/27/2015
-3-