Commonwealth v. Brown

Citation2012 PA Super 140,48 A.3d 1275
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Kenneth BROWN, Jr., Appellant.
Decision Date10 July 2012
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Vincent J. Quinn, Lancaster, for appellant.

Todd P. Kriner, Assistant District Attorney, Lancaster, for Commonwealth, appellee.

BEFORE: MUSMANNO, DONOHUE and COLVILLE*, JJ.

OPINION BY COLVILLE, J.:

This case is an appeal from the order denying Appellant's request for relief under the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”). The issue is whether Appellant's guilty plea was induced by the ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the order.

Appellant pled guilty to third degree murder, theft, flight to avoid apprehension, false imprisonment, abuse of corpse, and tampering with physical evidence. He received an aggregate sentence of 30 to 60 years. No post-sentence motions were filed, and Appellant did not file a direct appeal. Appellant filed a pro se petition under the PCRA, and the court appointed counsel to represent him. Counsel filed an amended PCRA petition, which was denied after a hearing, and Appellant filed this timely appeal.

Appellant's first argument is that he was essentially forced into pleading guilty because counsel did not adequately prepare for trial and did not adequately consult with Appellant. In support of this argument, he raises several points including: (1) counsel did not consult with Appellant to prepare possible defenses; (2) counsel told Appellant that if he went to trial, it was likely he would lose and receive a sentence of life imprisonment; (3) counsel never discussed the possibility of obtaining a verdict of less than third degree murder; (4) counsel never discussed the false imprisonment charge with Appellant; and (5) counsel caused Appellant to waive his preliminary hearing by promising to supply Appellant with discovery material, including a videotape, which Appellant contends he never received. For the reasons that follow, Appellant's points warrant no relief.

Our standard of review of the denial of a PCRA petition is limited to examining whether the court's rulings are supported by the evidence of record and free of legal error. Commonwealth v. Anderson, 995 A.2d 1184, 1189 (Pa.Super.2010). This Court treats the findings of the PCRA court with deference if the record supports those findings. Id. It is an appellant's burden to persuade this Court that the PCRA court erred and that relief is due. Commonwealth v. Bennett, 19 A.3d 541, 543 (Pa.Super.2011).

A PCRA petitioner may be entitled to relief if the petitioner effectively pleads and proves facts establishing ineffectiveness of prior counsel. Commonwealth v. Miner, 2012 WL 1383058, 3 (Pa.Super. filed April 23, 2012).

To establish ineffectiveness, a petitioner must plead and prove the underlying claim has arguable merit, counsel's actions lacked any reasonable basis, and counsel's actions prejudiced the petitioner. Counsel's actions will not be found to have lacked a reasonable basis unless the petitioner establishes that an alternative not chosen by counsel offered a potential for success substantially greater than the course actually pursued. Prejudice means that, absent counsel's conduct, there is a reasonable probability the outcome of the proceedings would have been different.

Id. (internal citations omitted).

The law does not require that an appellant be pleased with the results of the decision to enter a guilty plea; rather [a]ll that is required is that [appellant's] decision to plead guilty be knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made.” Commonwealth v. Moser, 921 A.2d 526, 528–29 (Pa.Super.2007).

A defendant is bound by the statements made during the plea colloquy, and a defendant may not later offer reasons for withdrawing the plea that contradict statements made when he pled. Commonwealth v. McCauley, 797 A.2d 920, 922 (Pa.Super.2001). Claims of counsel's ineffectiveness in connection with a guilty plea will provide a basis for relief only if the ineffectiveness actually caused an involuntary or unknowing plea. Id.

Appellant's position is that, because of all the foregoing points, he felt coerced, at the time of his plea hearing, to enter a guilty plea. However, at that hearing, Appellant testified that it was his decision to plead guilty, and that he was satisfied with the representation provided by counsel. N.T., 01/29/10, at 16. Appellant is bound by the statements made during the plea colloquy, and he may not now offer contradictory reasons for withdrawing his plea. Appellant may not be pleased with the results of entering a guilty plea, but he cannot now obtain relief by claiming he felt pressured by counsel to plead guilty. Appellant's first argument fails.

In his next argument, Appellant claims counsel was ineffective in allowing him to plead guilty to false imprisonment when there was no factual basis in the record to support the charge. This claim also fails.

Pennsylvania defines false imprisonment as follows:

§ 2903. False imprisonment

(a) Offense defined.—Except as provided under s...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • Commonwealth v. Wholaver
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • January 11, 2018
    ...Appellant has the burden to persuade this Court that the PCRA court erred and that such error requires relief. See Commonwealth v. Brown , 48 A.3d 1275, 1277 (Pa. Super. 2012) ("It is an appellant's burden to persuade [an appellate court] that the PCRA court erred and that relief is due.");......
  • Commonwealth v. Feliciano
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • July 1, 2013
    ...those findings. It is an appellant's burden to persuade this Court that the PCRA court erred and that relief is due.Commonwealth v. Brown, 48 A.3d 1275, 1277 (Pa.Super.2012) (citations omitted). In his first issue, Appellant contends that the PCRA court improperly deemed his petition untime......
  • Dinicola v. Glunt
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • February 4, 2015
    ...counsel's conduct, there is a reasonable probability the outcome of the proceedings would have been different. Commonwealth v. Brown, 48 A.3d 1275, 1277 (Pa. Super. 2012) (citations omitted), appeal denied, 63 A.3d 773 (Pa. 2013). " ' A failure to satisfy any prong of the test for ineffecti......
  • Commonwealth v. Echevarria
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • September 13, 2013
    ...may not later offer reasons for withdrawing the plea that contradict statements made when he pled. . . ." Commonwealth v. Brown, 48 A.3d 1275, 1277-78 (Pa. Super. 2012) (citations omitted).III. Discussion In the instant case, Petitioner claims his guilty plea was entered into involuntarily,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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