Com. v. Jimenez, J. a/k/a Serrano, J.

J-S67025-19
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
:
v. :
:
:
JEAN MICHAEL JIMENEZ A/K/A JEAN :
MICHAEL SERRANO :
: No. 645 MDA 2019
Appellant :
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered April 16, 2019
In the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County Criminal Division at
No(s): CP-40-CR-0001636-2018,
CP-40-CR-0001637-2018, CP-40-CR-0004178-2018
BEFORE: OLSON, J., DUBOW, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*
JUDGMENT ORDER BY DUBOW, J.: FILED JANUARY 16, 2020
Appellant, Jean Michael Jimenez a/k/a Jean Michael Serrano, appeals
from the Judgment of Sentence entered in the Luzerne County Court of
Common Pleas, following his guilty pleas to multiple counts of Possession with
Intent to Deliver (PWID), Aggravated Assault, Recklessly Endangering Another
Person (REAP), Persons Not to Possess Firearms, Criminal Use of
Communication Facility, and Driving while Operating Privilege
____________________________________________
* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S67025-19
Suspended/Revoked.1 Based on our Supreme Court’s decision in
Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969 (Pa. 2018), we quash this appeal.2
In January 2018, police conducted a “buy-bust” operation in which
Appellant negotiated the sale of heroin with a confidential informant. 3 As
officers approached his vehicle, Appellant sped away from the scene, nearly
striking an officer. Police later found the vehicle unoccupied and seized heroin
from it.
Thereafter, several law enforcement agencies converged on a residence
in Wilkes-Barre to apprehend Appellant. Officers took Appellant into custody
and, pursuant to a search warrant, seized heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine,
and marijuana from the residence. In addition, officers seized a Glock semi-
automatic pistol.
In April 2019, Appellant pleaded guilty as follows. At Docket No. 1636-
2018, Appellant pleaded guilty to four counts of PWID and one count of
Persons Not to Possess Firearms. At Docket No. 1637-2018, Appellant
pleaded guilty to one count each of PWID, Aggravated Assault, REAP, and
____________________________________________
1 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(30); 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 2702(a)(2), 2705, 6105(c)(1),
7512; 75 Pa.C.S. § 1543, respectively.
2 In this Court, counsel has filed an Anders Brief and Petition to Withdraw.
See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Commonwealth v.
Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009). In light of our disposition, we deny
counsel’s Petition as moot.
3We derive the facts and procedural history from the trial court’s Pa.R.A.P.
1925(b) Opinion, filed August 21, 2019.
-2-
J-S67025-19
Criminal Use of Communication Facility. At Docket No. 4178-2018, Appellant
pleaded guilty to Driving while Operating Privilege Suspended/Revoked. The
trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 96 to 192 months of
incarceration, plus fines, costs, and restitution.
In April 2019, Appellant pro se filed a single Notice of Appeal listing each
of his three docket numbers. Thereafter, Appellant timely filed a counseled
Post-Sentence Motion, which was denied, thus perfecting Appellant’s appeal.4
Appellant filed a court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement, and the court
filed a responsive Opinion.
In June 2018, our Supreme Court disapproved of the common practice
of filing a single notice of appeal from an order or judgment involving more
than one docket number. See generally Walker, supra. The Court
observed that “the proper practice under [Pa.R.A.P.] 341(a) is to file separate
appeals from an order that resolves issues arising on more than one docket.”
Walker, 185 A.3d at 977. Accordingly, the Court determined, “[t]he failure
to do so requires the appellate court to quash the appeal.” Id.
In this case, Appellant filed a single Notice of Appeal from the Judgments
of Sentence imposed at three separate docket numbers. Appellant’s appeal
postdates the Walker decision. Accordingly, we are constrained to quash this
appeal.
____________________________________________
4 See Commonwealth v. Cooper, 27 A.3d 994 (Pa. 2011).
-3-
J-S67025-19
Appeal quashed; Petition to Withdraw denied as moot.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 1/16/2020
-4-