Commonwealth v. Watley, 845 EDA 2016
Decision Date | 29 December 2016 |
Docket Number | No. 845 EDA 2016,845 EDA 2016 |
Citation | 153 A.3d 1034 |
Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Andre Raymelle WATLEY, Appellant |
Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
Matthew J. Deschler, Bethlehem, for appellant.
John M. Morganelli, District Attorney, and Rebecca J. Kulik, Assistant District Attorney, Easton, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Andre Raymelle Watley appeals from the January 27, 2016 order of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County dismissing, in part, his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act ("PCRA"), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541 –9546.We affirm.
This Court previously summarized the factual background of this matter as follows:
Commonwealth v. Watley , 81 A.3d 108, 111–13(Pa.Super.2013)(en banc )(footnote omitted).
Following a jury trial, Watley was convicted of two counts of firearms not to be carried without a license, one count of possession with intent to deliver ("PWID") ecstasy, one count of criminal conspiracy to commit PWID, one count of possession of ecstasy, one count of possession of a small amount of marijuana, one count of false identification to law enforcement,1 and two summary offenses.The court imposed consecutive sentences of 42–84 months on the firearms charges, 60–120 months on the PWID charge,2 4–12 months on the false identification charge, and a consecutive sentence of 15–30 days on the marijuana charge.
Subsequently, as the trial court explained:
Opinion, 1/27/16, at 1–2("PCRA Op.").
On January 27, 2016, the PCRA court vacated Watley's sentence and ordered re-sentencing to be held on March 11, 2016.3The PCRA court explained that, pursuant to Alleyne v. United States , ––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314(2013), andCommonwealth v. Newman , 99 A.3d 86(Pa.Super.2014), Watley's mandatory minimum sentence was unconstitutional.PCRA Op.at 7.The PCRA court further explained that Watley's sentence had to be vacated in its entirety because the entire sentencing scheme was impacted.Id.The PCRA court denied Watley's petition in all other aspects.Watley filed a timely notice of appeal on February 19, 2016.4
Watley raises the following issues on appeal:
Watley's Br.at 4–5(suggested answers omitted).
Our standard of review from the denial of post-conviction relief "is limited to examining whether the PCRA court's determination is supported by the evidence of record and whether it is free of legal error."Commonwealth v. Ousley , 21 A.3d 1238, 1242(Pa.Super.2011).This Court"will not disturb findings that are supported by the record."Id.
We first address Watley's claims for ineffective assistance of counsel.When analyzing ineffectiveness claims, we begin with the presumption that counsel was effective.Commonwealth v. Spotz , 610 Pa. 17, 18 A.3d 244, 259–60(2011)."[T]he defendant bears the burden of proving ineffectiveness."Commonwealth v. Ligons , 601 Pa. 103, 971 A.2d 1125, 1137(2009).To overcome the presumption of effectiveness, a PCRApetitioner must demonstrate that: "(1) the underlying substantive claim has arguable merit; (2)counsel whose effectiveness is being challenged did not have a reasonable basis for his or her actions or failure to act; and (3)the petitioner suffered prejudice as a result of counsel's deficient performance."Id."A claim of ineffectiveness will be denied if the petitioner's evidence fails to meet any of these...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Commonwealth v. Grove
...Id. at 24–25. They distinguished Bryant as "applying only to capital petitioners." Id. at 24.13 Most recently, in Commonwealth v. Watley, 153 A.3d 1034 (Pa. Super. 2016), appeal denied, ––– Pa. ––––, 169 A.3d 574, 2017 WL 2538785 (2017), a panel of this Court cited the lead opinion in Gaine......
-
Commonwealth v. Padilla
...v. Cooper , 994 A.2d 589, 592 (Pa.Super. 2010), appeal denied , 608 Pa. 660, 13 A.3d 474 (2010). See also Commonwealth v. Watley , 153 A.3d 1034, 1045 (Pa.Super. 2016) (explaining that it was not relevant to reasonable suspicion inquiry that "neither of the troopers testified that they fear......
-
Commonwealth v. Jackson
...evidence had been suppressed, there is a reasonable probability that the verdict would have been more favorable." Commonwealth v. Watley, 153 A.3d 1034, 1044 (Pa. Super. 2014).A review of appellant's amended petition indicates that he failed to provide sufficient legal or factual support fo......
-
Commonwealth v. Grove, J-A15046-17
...Id. at 24-25. They distinguished Bryant as "applying only to capital petitioners." Id. at 24.13 Most recently, in Commonwealth v. Watley, 153 A.3d 1034 (Pa. Super. 2016), appeal denied, No. 69 MAL 2017, 2017 WL 2538785 (Pa., June 12, 2017), a panel of this Court cited the lead opinion in Ga......