sentencing guidelines factors in Pennsylvania

2022Commonwealth v. Zeigler, 112 A.3d 656, 662 (Pa. Super. 2015); Commonwealth v. Fisher, 47 A.3d 155, 159 (Pa. Super. 2012); Commonwealth v. Titus, 816 A.2d 251 , 255–56 (Pa. Super. 2003).

2020Dempster, 187 A.3d at 272 -23 n.6; Bynum-Hamilton, 135 A.3d at 184 ; Commonwealth v. Fisher, 47 A.3d 155, 159 (Pa. Super. 2012); Commonwealth v. Titus, 816 A.2d 251 , 255–56 (Pa. Super. 2003). ____________________________________________ 5 An appellant challenging the discretionary aspects of sentence is also required to satisfy other requirements, including filing a timely post sentence motion and complying with Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

2020Dempster, 187 A.3d at 272 -23 n.6; Bynum-Hamilton, 135 A.3d at 184 ; Commonwealth v. Fisher, 47 A.3d 155, 159 (Pa. Super. 2012); Commonwealth v. Titus, 816 A.2d 251 , 255–56 (Pa. Super. 2003). ____________________________________________ 5 An appellant challenging the discretionary aspects of sentence is also required to satisfy other requirements, including filing a timely post sentence motion and complying with Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

2019Dempster, 187 A.3d at 272 ; Bynum-Hamilton, 135 A.3d at 184 ; Zeigler, 112 A.3d at 661 .5 A claim that a sentence within statutory limits is excessive is generally not sufficient to raise a substantial question, absent a claim that the sentence violates a specific provision of the Sentencing Code or that the sentencing court did not consider the sentencing guidelines or factors concerning the crimes and the defendant that a sentencing court is to consider under the Sentencing Code.

2020Dempster, 187 A.3d at 272 -23 n.6; Bynum-Hamilton, 135 A.3d at 184 ; Commonwealth v. Fisher, 47 A.3d 155, 159 (Pa. Super. 2012); Commonwealth v. Titus, 816 A.2d 251 , 255–56 (Pa. Super. 2003). ____________________________________________ 5 An appellant challenging the discretionary aspects of sentence is also required to satisfy other requirements, including filing a timely post sentence motion and complying with Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

2019Dempster, 187 A.3d at 272 ; Bynum-Hamilton, 135 A.3d at 184 ; Zeigler, 112 A.3d at 661 .5 A claim that a sentence within statutory limits is excessive is generally not sufficient to raise a substantial question, absent a claim that the sentence violates a specific provision of the Sentencing Code or that the sentencing court did not consider the sentencing guidelines or factors concerning the crimes and the defendant that a sentencing court is to consider under the Sentencing Code.

2017Id. (quotation marks and internal citations omitted).

2015Id.

2022He filed identical timely pro se PCRA petitions for both cases, claiming that he received a mandatory sentence for persons not to possess firearms in violation of Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013), which holds that any factor that increases a mandatory minimum sentence is an element of the crime to ____________________________________________ 4 The prosecutor told the plea court that the statutory maximum sentence for persons not to possess firearms was ten years, and that Hairston’s minimum sentence for that offense therefore could not exceed five years even though the sentencing g

2019See Appellant’s PCRA petition, 10/15/18, at 1; Trial Court Docket 4485-2007, at 22; Trial Court Docket 5930-2015, at 10. 3 Appellant has complied with our Supreme Court’s holding in Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969 (Pa. 2018) by filing separate notices of appeal at each docket, “where a single order resolves issues arising on more than one docket.” Id. at 971 . -3- J-S41030-19 Appellant alleges that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence, failed to consider the Sentencing Guidelines and the factors delineated in 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9721(b), and failed to make a contemporaneous statement

2019See Appellant’s PCRA petition, 10/15/18, at 1; Trial Court Docket 4485-2007, at 22; Trial Court Docket 5930-2015, at 10. 3 Appellant has complied with our Supreme Court’s holding in Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969 (Pa. 2018) by filing separate notices of appeal at each docket, “where a single order resolves issues arising on more than one docket.” Id. at 971 . -3- J-S41030-19 Appellant alleges that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence, failed to consider the Sentencing Guidelines and the factors delineated in 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9721(b), and failed to make a contemporaneous statement

2019Id. (citation omitted).

2015It further claims the “sentence was not consistent with the seriousness and gravity of the felony offenses,” and the trial court “inappropriately relied upon factors already integrated in the formulation of the Sentencing Guidelines for the standard range, typical case of the same offense.” Id.

2007Appellant lodged an appeal -with the Superior Court challenging the legality of his sentence pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), which, he argued, preclude a judge from imposing any sentence greater than the Sentencing Guidelines’ standard range unless the reasons for the enhancement are established by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

2007Appellant lodged an appeal -with the Superior Court challenging the legality of his sentence pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), which, he argued, preclude a judge from imposing any sentence greater than the Sentencing Guidelines’ standard range unless the reasons for the enhancement are established by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

2007Appellant lodged an appeal -with the Superior Court challenging the legality of his sentence pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), which, he argued, preclude a judge from imposing any sentence greater than the Sentencing Guidelines’ standard range unless the reasons for the enhancement are established by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

2007Appellant lodged an appeal -with the Superior Court challenging the legality of his sentence pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s holdings in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 580 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 , 124 S.Ct. 2531 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), which, he argued, preclude a judge from imposing any sentence greater than the Sentencing Guidelines’ standard range unless the reasons for the enhancement are established by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

1994It is true that this Court, in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 365 Pa.Super. 556 , 559 n. 1, 530 A.2d 450 , 452 n. 1 (1987), stated in dicta, by use of a footnote, that a sentencing guidelines claim, when couched in terms of the ineffective assistance of counsel, raises an issue under the sixth amendment of the federal constitution, thereby escaping the need for compliance with Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508 , 522 A.2d 17 (1987) and Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

1994It is true that this Court, in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 365 Pa.Super. 556 , 559 n. 1, 530 A.2d 450 , 452 n. 1 (1987), stated in dicta, by use of a footnote, that a sentencing guidelines claim, when couched in terms of the ineffective assistance of counsel, raises an issue under the sixth amendment of the federal constitution, thereby escaping the need for compliance with Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508 , 522 A.2d 17 (1987) and Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

1994It is true that this Court, in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 365 Pa.Super. 556 , 559 n. 1, 530 A.2d 450 , 452 n. 1 (1987), stated in dicta, by use of a footnote, that a sentencing guidelines claim, when couched in terms of the ineffective assistance of counsel, raises an issue under the sixth amendment of the federal constitution, thereby escaping the need for compliance with Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508 , 522 A.2d 17 (1987) and Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).

1994It is true that this Court, in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 365 Pa.Super. 556 , 559 n. 1, 530 A.2d 450 , 452 n. 1 (1987), stated in dicta, by use of a footnote, that a sentencing guidelines claim, when couched in terms of the ineffective assistance of counsel, raises an issue under the sixth amendment of the federal constitution, thereby escaping the need for compliance with Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508 , 522 A.2d 17 (1987) and Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f).