Com. v. Green, D. ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • J-S24014-21
    
    2021 PA Super 216
    COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA                 :   IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
    :        PENNSYLVANIA
    Appellant               :
    :
    :
    v.                             :
    :
    :
    DAMIEN A. GREEN                              :   No. 355 WDA 2021
    Appeal from the Order Entered March 10, 2021
    In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County Criminal Division at No(s):
    CP-07-CR-0000638-2020
    BEFORE:      DUBOW, J., KING, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*
    OPINION BY DUBOW, J.:                                  FILED: OCTOBER 25, 2021
    The Commonwealth appeals from the Order granting the Petition for
    Decertification filed by Appellee Damien A. Green and transferring charges of
    Second-Degree Murder and other offenses to the juvenile court for
    adjudication.1 After careful review, we quash this appeal because the order
    from which the Commonwealth appeals is a legal nullity.
    On February 27, 2020, Devon Pfirsching died after an assault and a
    gunshot wound in the head.             After an investigation, the Commonwealth
    charged Appellee, who was 15 years old at the time of the incident, and three
    ____________________________________________
    * Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
    1 The Commonwealth certified with its Notice of Appeal that the interlocutory
    decertification of this matter and transfer to juvenile court will terminate or
    substantially handicap the prosecution of these criminal offenses. Pa.R.A.P.
    311(d).
    J-S24014-21
    other juveniles with Murder, Robbery, Conspiracy to Commit Robbery, and
    related offenses.
    Appellee and the other three juveniles each filed Petitions to Decertify,
    seeking the appointment of an expert and the transfer of their cases to
    juvenile court. The court appointed an expert and scheduled individual and
    separate hearings for each of the juvenile’s decertification petitions.
    The court held a two-day remote hearing on Appellee’s decertification
    petition. At the close of evidence on January 19, 2021, the court noted that
    it had twenty days after the hearing to issue its decision, i.e., until February
    8, 2021.
    On March 10, 2021, fifty days after the hearing, the court entered its
    Order stating first that it “made decision [sic] and finding in this matter on
    February 2, 2021.”2 The court then stated that Appellee had “proven by a
    preponderance of the evidence that the interest of society is served by
    decertification because the supervision, rehabilitation, and care he will receive
    in the juvenile system for up to five years will promote responsibility and the
    ability for him to become a productive member of society.”         Order, dated
    ____________________________________________
    2 The docket is devoid of any indication that the court issued a “decision and
    finding” on February 2, 2021, or otherwise communicated with the parties
    after the January 19, 2021 hearing. The Commonwealth asserts, however,
    that during a phone call on March 8, 2021, the court requested that the
    litigants waive the statutory twenty-day deadline provided in 42 Pa.C.S. 6322
    and Pa.R.Crim.P. 597. The parties responded in writing the next day, with the
    Commonwealth declining the court’s request, noting that the statutory time
    limit could not be waived, and positing that the decertification petition had
    already been denied by operation of law. Commonwealth’s Br. at 12-13.
    -2-
    J-S24014-21
    3/9/21. The Court sealed its Opinion in Support of its Order pending the final
    hearing on one co-defendant’s decertification petition.3
    The Commonwealth filed its Notice of Appeal on March 10, 2021,
    followed by a court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement.          The trial court
    submitted a responsive Rule 1925(a) Opinion.
    The Commonwealth raised two issues for our review, the first of which
    implicates this Court’s jurisdiction to review this appeal.4 The Commonwealth
    first asserts that because “the lower court . . . did not take action until March
    9, 2021 (approximately fifty (50) days after the hearing),” the court “lost
    jurisdiction to take action on Appellee’s petition.” Appellant’s Br. at 23 (citing
    42 Pa.C.S. § 6322(b) and Pa.R.Crim.P. 597(d)). The Commonwealth requests
    that this Court “deem the lower court’s untimely order granting decertification
    a legal nullity[.]” Id. at 24. Because a legally-null order renders an appeal
    taken therefrom likewise legally null, we must address this issue first.
    Commonwealth v. Spencer, 
    496 A.2d 1156
    , 1160 (Pa. Super. 1985).
    ____________________________________________
    3 In its Order entered March 10, 2021, the court noted that it had requested
    that the parties waive the 20-day deadline for issuance of its Order and
    Opinion because its disposition “could influence ongoing testimony in the
    joined co-defendant’s Petition for Certification.” Order, 3/9/21. The court,
    thus, noted that it “memorialized its previous decision and findings in Order
    form” indicating it would “issue an Opinion under seal, which will be released
    at the conclusion of the hearing for the co-defendant.” 
    Id.
     The court
    distributed its full Opinion in this matter to the parties on March 19, 2021.
    4 The Commonwealth’s second issue challenges the sufficiency of the evidence
    supporting the court’s determination. Based on the disposition of the first
    issue, we may not address this sufficiency challenge.
    -3-
    J-S24014-21
    When the Commonwealth charges a juvenile with murder, jurisdiction is
    vested with the criminal division of the court of common pleas. See 42 Pa.C.S.
    §§ 6302, 6322(a) (excluding murder from the definition of “delinquent acts”
    that are reviewable under the court of common pleas’ juvenile division’s
    original jurisdiction). However, a juvenile charged with murder may request
    that the matter be decertified and transferred to the juvenile division for
    adjudication.     Commonwealth v. Ruffin, 
    10 A.3d 336
    , 338 (Pa. Super.
    2010).    The court must then hold a hearing at which the juvenile must
    establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the transfer will serve the
    public interest. 42 Pa. C.S. § 6322(a). If the court finds that the juvenile has
    met his burden under subsection (a), “the court shall make findings of fact,
    including specific references to the evidence, and conclusions of law in support
    of the transfer order.” 42 Pa.C.S. § 6322(b). “If the court does not make
    its finding within 20 days of the hearing on the petition to transfer the
    case, the defendant’s petition to transfer the case shall be denied by
    operation of law.” Id. (emphasis added).5
    If a court issues an order after statutory time limits have passed, that
    order is a legal nullity. Commonwealth v. Martinez, 
    141 A.3d 485
    , 490-91
    ____________________________________________
    5 Our rules of criminal procedure also require the court to announce its
    decision regarding the transfer of the case in open court no later than 20 days
    after the hearing. Pa.R.Crim.P. 597(C). If no decision is rendered within 20
    days of the conclusion of the hearing, the motion for transfer “shall be denied
    by operation of law. The clerk of courts immediately shall enter an order on
    behalf of the judge.” 
    Id. at 597
    (D). The court in this case did not follow this
    rule.
    -4-
    J-S24014-21
    (Pa. Super. 2016). See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Bentley, 
    831 A.2d 668
    ,
    670 (Pa. Super. 2003) (failure to rule on a post-sentence motion within the
    prescribed period divested the court of jurisdiction to render a decision at a
    later date); Commonwealth v. Santone, 
    757 A.2d 963
    , 966 (Pa. Super.
    2000) (concluding that an order issued beyond the time period set forth in
    what is now Pa.R.Crim.P. 720 was a legal nullity).
    Here, the court had the authority to act on Appellee’s decertification and
    transfer petition until February 8, 2021, twenty days after the conclusion of
    the hearing. After February 8, 2021, pursuant to Section 6322, the court no
    longer had the authority to act on the petition. The court’s Order granting the
    petition, entered on March 10, 2021, is, thus, a legal nullity.
    Because the court’s order is a legal nullity, this Appeal is also a legal
    nullity. Accordingly, we quash this appeal.
    Appeal quashed.
    Judgment Entered.
    Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
    Prothonotary
    Date: 10/25/2021
    -5-
    J-S24014-21
    -6-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 355 WDA 2021

Judges: Dubow

Filed Date: 10/25/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/21/2024