Commonwealth v. Briggs, 100 WDA 2022

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
Writing for the CourtBENDER, P.J.E.
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JOSEPH W. BRIGGS Appellant
Docket Number100 WDA 2022,J-S25015-22
Decision Date16 September 2022

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.

JOSEPH W. BRIGGS Appellant

No. 100 WDA 2022

No. J-S25015-22

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

September 16, 2022


NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered December 15, 2021 In the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-02-CR-0012107-2003

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DUBOW, J., and KING, J.

MEMORANDUM

BENDER, P.J.E.

Appellant, Joseph W. Briggs, appeals from the post-conviction court's December 15, 2021 order denying his petition filed under the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. After careful review, we affirm.

In 2006, Appellant was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder. He was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment, without the possibility of parole. Appellant filed a direct appeal, and this Court affirmed his judgment of sentence on June 11, 2008. See Commonwealth v. Briggs, 959 A.2d 457 (Pa. Super. 2008) (unpublished memorandum). Although Appellant did not immediately file a petition for allowance of appeal with our Supreme Court, his right to do so was ultimately reinstated during post-conviction proceedings. Thereafter, Appellant filed a nunc pro tunc petition for allowance of appeal, which our Supreme Court denied on July 2, 2013. Commonwealth v. Briggs, 69 A.3d 599 (Pa. 2013).

1

On June 5, 2014, Appellant filed a timely, pro se PCRA petition. After delays not pertinent to the issue he raises herein, counsel was appointed and filed an amended petition on Appellant's behalf on February 24, 2021. Therein, Appellant asserted that his appellate counsel was ineffective for not arguing on appeal that the trial court erred by denying Appellant's request to waive his right to a jury trial. After the PCRA court conducted a hearing on September 20, 2021, it issued an order on January 14, 2022, denying Appellant's petition.

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and he also timely complied with the PCRA court's order to file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) concise statement of errors complained of on appeal. The court filed its Rule 1925(a) opinion on March 17, 2022. Herein, Appellant states one issue for our review:

I. Did the [PCRA] court abuse its discretion in denying the PCRA petition, as amended, where [Appellant] established that counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a claim on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to allow [Appellant] to waive a jury trial

Appellant's Brief at 4 (unnecessary capitalization omitted).

"This Court's standard of review from the grant or denial of post-conviction relief is limited to examining whether the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT