Com. v. Romanelli, A.

J-A31016-16
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
ANTHONY M. ROMANELLI
Appellant No. 2114 EDA 2015
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence May 29, 2015
In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0300422-2005
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., MOULTON, J., and FITZGERALD, J.*
MEMORANDUM BY MOULTON, J.: FILED AUGUST 21, 2017
Anthony M. Romanelli appeals from the May 29, 2015 judgment of
sentence entered in the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas
following a resentencing hearing pursuant to Commonwealth v. Batts, 66
A.3d 286 (Pa. 2013) (“Batts I”). The trial court resentenced Romanelli to
life in prison without parole on a conviction for second-degree murder, which
he committed when he was 17 years old. Following the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Batts, __ A.3d ___, 2017
WL 2735411 (Pa. June 26, 2017) (“Batts II”), we vacate the judgment of
sentence and remand for resentencing.
____________________________________________
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A31016-16
On November 30, 2006, a jury convicted Romanelli of second-degree
murder, robbery, aggravated indecent assault, burglary, and conspiracy.1
On February 2, 2007, the trial court sentenced Romanelli to the then-
mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for
the second-degree murder conviction and a consecutive term of 10 to 20
years’ imprisonment for the conspiracy conviction. On March 1, 2010, this
Court affirmed his judgment of sentence. On June 27, 2013, the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court vacated Romanelli’s life-without-parole
sentence and remanded for resentencing.
On May 29, 2015, the trial court held a sentencing hearing and again
sentenced Romanelli to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for
the second-degree murder conviction and a consecutive term of 10 to 20
years’ imprisonment for the conspiracy conviction. Romanelli filed a post-
sentence motion, which the trial court denied on June 23, 2015. On July 9,
2015, Romanelli filed a timely notice of appeal.
Romanelli raises the following issues on appeal:
1. Is it unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile convicted of
second degree murder to life imprisonment without the
possibility of parole?
2. Absent a finding that a juvenile is permanently
incorrigible, is it unconstitutional to sentence a juvenile to
life imprisonment without the possibility of parole?
____________________________________________
1
18 Pa.C.S. §§ 2502(b), 3701(a)(1), 3125, 3502(a), and 903,
respectively.
-2-
J-A31016-16
3. Under the circumstances of this case, was it
unconstitutional to sentence Anthony Romanelli to life
imprisonment without the possibility of parole?
Romanelli’s Br. at 3 (suggested answers omitted).
A claim that a juvenile defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment
without the possibility of parole absent a finding that he “will forever be
incorrigible, without any hope for rehabilitation” challenges the legality of
the sentence. Batts II, 2017 WL 2735411, at *18. Our standard of review
is de novo, and our scope of review is plenary. Id.
In reviewing a post-Miller2 resentencing, our Supreme Court recently
“established several procedural safeguards designed to ensure that only the
‘rarest of juvenile offenders’ receive a life-without-parole sentence.”
Commonwealth v. Coia, ___ A.3d ____, 2017 WL 3223019, at *2
(Pa.Super. July 31, 2017) (quoting Batts II, 2017 WL 2735411, at *1).
This Court has summarized the procedural safeguards as follows:
First, the [Supreme] Court concluded that trial courts must
apply a presumption against the imposition of a life-
without-parole sentence for juvenile offenders. [Batts II,
2017 WL 2735411, at *1.] Second, it held that the
Commonwealth bears the burden of rebutting this
presumption by establishing beyond a reasonable doubt
that the juvenile offender is “permanently incorrigible” and
“incapable of rehabilitation.” Id. Third, it required the
Commonwealth to provide reasonable notice to the
defendant of its intent to seek a sentence of life without
parole. Id. at *34.
____________________________________________
2
Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 132 S. Ct. 2455, 2460, 183
L. Ed. 2d 407 (2012).
-3-
J-A31016-16
Id.3
Here, the trial court resentenced Romanelli to a life-without-parole
sentence for the second-degree murder conviction following a resentencing
hearing. The trial court considered the age-related factors as dictated by
our Supreme Court in Batts I. It did not, however, apply the later-
established presumption against the imposition of a life-without-parole
sentence or require the Commonwealth to rebut that presumption with
evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that Romanelli is
“permanently incorrigible” and “unable to be rehabilitated.” Batts II, 2017
WL 2735411, at *37.
Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of sentence and remand this
case to the trial court for resentencing in light of Batts II.4
Judgment of sentence vacated. Case remanded. Jurisdiction
relinquished.
____________________________________________
3
The Supreme Court further concluded that expert testimony would
not be required to rebut the presumption against permanent incorrigibility
beyond a reasonable doubt, but noted that “[g]iven the presumption against
life without parole and the Commonwealth’s burden beyond a reasonable
doubt to rebut the presumption, it is difficult to conceive of a case where the
Commonwealth would not proffer expert testimony and where the sentence
would not find expert testimony to be necessary.” Batts II, 2017 WL
2735411, at *34.
4
Because we have vacated Romanelli’s judgment of sentence, we
need not reach the remaining issues raised on appeal, including whether
imposition of a life-without-parole sentence on a juvenile convicted of
second-degree murder is unconstitutional.
-4-
J-A31016-16
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 8/21/2017
-5-