McClendon brief in Pennsylvania

2019See Commonwealth v. McBride, 957 A.2d 752, 758 (Pa. Super. 2008) (“If counsel files a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief pursuant to Rule 1925(c)(4), a trial court Opinion is not necessary and the trial court record shall be certified and transmitted back to this Court.”). -2- J-S29021-19 Santiago, 978 A.2d at 361 .

2018While counsel’s letter did not mention either the trial court’s Rule 1925(a) opinion or Appellant’s Rule 1925(b) statement, the record does reflect that Appellant’s counsel filed a statement of intent to file “an Anders/McClendon brief” on July 20, 2017 and the trial court responded by entering an order to transmit the record, citing Commonwealth v. McBride, -3- J-S11023-18 957 A.2d 752, 758 (Pa. Super. 2008) (“If counsel files a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief pursuant to Rule 1925(c)(4), a trial court opinion is not necessary and the trial court record shall be certifie

2024See Millisock, supra. Additionally, counsel filed an Anders/McClendon brief, in which she complies with the procedures of Santiago, supra. Accordingly, we find that counsel has substantially complied11 with the requirements of Anders, McClendon, and Santiago, and we proceed with an independent review of the merits.

2023See Millisock, supra. Additionally, counsel filed an Anders/McClendon brief, in which he complies with the procedures of Santiago, supra. Accordingly, we find that counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders, McClendon, and Santiago, and we proceed with an independent review of the merits.

2021See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(4) (providing that, in a criminal case, counsel may file a record and serve on the judge a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief in lieu of filing a statement); see also Interest of J.T., 983 A.2d 771 (Pa. Super. 2009) (determining that the Anders procedure set forth in Rule 1925(c)(4) is proper in a termination of parental rights case).

2020See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(4) (providing that, in a criminal case, counsel may file of record and serve on the judge a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief in lieu of filing a statement); see also Interest of J.T., 983 A.2d 771 (Pa. Super. 2009) (determining that the Anders procedure set forth in Rule 1925(c)(4) is proper in a termination of parental rights case).

2024See Millisock, supra. Additionally, counsel filed an Anders/McClendon brief, in which she complies with the procedures of Santiago, supra. Accordingly, we find that counsel has substantially complied11 with the requirements of Anders, McClendon, and Santiago, and we proceed with an independent review of the merits.

2023See Millisock, supra. Additionally, counsel filed an Anders/McClendon brief, in which he complies with the procedures of Santiago, supra. Accordingly, we find that counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders, McClendon, and Santiago, and we proceed with an independent review of the merits.

2019See Commonwealth v. Goodwin, 928 A.2d 287, 293 (Pa. Super. 2007) (en banc) (finding that under the newly promulgated Rule 1925, the concise statement filed by appellant's attorney indicating that 'there were no non - frivolous matters that can be raised on appeal', would be accepted by the Court as a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief).

2018See Commonwealth v. Goodwin, 928 A.2d 287, 293 (Pa.Super. 2007) (en banc) (finding that under the newly promulgated Rule 1925, the concise statement filed by appellant’s attorney indicating that ‘there were no non-frivolous matters that can be raised on appeal’, would be accepted by the Court as a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief).

2019Appellant’s counsel responded by filing a “statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief,”2 in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule ____________________________________________ 2See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Commonwealth v. McClendon, 434 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 1981). -2- J-A11026-19 of Appellate Procedure 1925(c)(4).3 See Counsel’s Rule 1925(c)(4) Statement, 10/3/18, at 1.

2018Accordingly, Appellant’s counsel did not file an Anders/McClendon brief, and as a result, Appellant presents the following issue: ____________________________________________ 1Pennsylvania’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9799.10-9799.41. 2 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Commonwealth v. McClendon, 434 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 1981). -2- J-S16030-18 WHETHER THE PORTION OF [APPELLANT’S] SENTENCE DEEMING HIM A SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR IS ILLEGAL.

2024See Flowers, supra. ____________________________________________ 10 Counsel has not, in her application to withdraw as counsel, represented that she made “a conscientious examination of the record[ and] has determined that the appeal would be frivolous[,]” as required by Cartrette, supra, which we also stated in our prior memorandum, denying her petition to withdraw.

2021See Commonwealth v. Cartrette, 83 A.3d 1030, 1032 (Pa. Super. 2013).

2024See Flowers, supra. ____________________________________________ 10 Counsel has not, in her application to withdraw as counsel, represented that she made “a conscientious examination of the record[ and] has determined that the appeal would be frivolous[,]” as required by Cartrette, supra, which we also stated in our prior memorandum, denying her petition to withdraw.

2023See Flowers, supra. The standard of review in termination of parental rights cases requires appellate courts to accept the findings of fact and credibility determinations of the trial court if they are supported by the record.

2023We remind Counsel that Turner/Finley is the proper framework for withdrawing from PCRA representation, which — while a “close -9- J-S03022-23 cousin[ ]” — is distinct from Anders.11 See Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717, 721-22 (Pa. Super. 2007).

2017Citing Commonwealth v. McBride, 957 A.2d 752, 758 (Pa. Super. 2008), wherein this Court stated that a trial court opinion is not necessary following a Rule 1925(c)(4) statement, the revocation court declined to file an opinion pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a). -5- J-S14035-17 Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717, 720-21 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citations omitted).

2019Commonwealth v. Boyd, 763 A.2d 421, 423 (Pa. Super. 2000).

2008Id. ¶ 12 Pursuant to the recent amendments of Rule 1925, if counsel intends to submit an Anders/McClendon brief, the proper procedure is provided in Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(4): *757 In a criminal case, counsel may file of record and serve on the judge a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief in lieu of filing a Statement.

2019Appellant’s counsel responded by filing a “statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief,”2 in accordance with Pennsylvania Rule ____________________________________________ 2See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) and Commonwealth v. McClendon, 434 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 1981). -2- J-A11026-19 of Appellate Procedure 1925(c)(4).3 See Counsel’s Rule 1925(c)(4) Statement, 10/3/18, at 1.

2018Accordingly, Appellant’s counsel did not file an Anders/McClendon brief, and as a result, Appellant presents the following issue: ____________________________________________ 1Pennsylvania’s Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (“SORNA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9799.10-9799.41. 2 Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Commonwealth v. McClendon, 434 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 1981). -2- J-S16030-18 WHETHER THE PORTION OF [APPELLANT’S] SENTENCE DEEMING HIM A SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR IS ILLEGAL.

2016First, counsel must “petition the court for leave to withdraw stating that, after making a conscientious examination of the record, counsel has determined that the appeal would be frivolous.” Miller, 715 A.2d at 1207 .

2015Commonwealth v. Miller, 715 A.2d 1203, 1207 (Pa. Super. 1998).

2019Counsel also must provide the appellant with a copy of the Anders brief, together with a letter that advises the appellant of his or her right to “(1) retain new counsel to pursue the appeal; (2) proceed pro se on appeal; or (3) raise any points that the appellant deems worthy of the [C]Jourt’s attention in addition to the points raised by counsel in the Anders brief.” Commonwealth v. Nischan, 928 A.2d 349, 353 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citation omitted).

2019Our law “makes clear that by entering a ____________________________________________ 9 In the trial court, counsel filed a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief in compliance with Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(c)(4). -3- J-S04027-19 [no contest] plea, the defendant waives his right to challenge on direct appeal all nonjurisdictional defects except the legality of the sentence and the validity of the plea.” Commonwealth v. Lincoln, 72 A.3d 606, 609 (Pa. Super. 2013), appeal denied, 87 A.3d 319 (Pa. 2014).

2018See Commonwealth v. Rojas, 874 A.2d 638, 639 (Pa. Super. 2005) (“‘When faced with a purported Anders brief, this Court may not review the merits of the underlying issues without first passing on the request to withdraw.’”) (citation omitted).7 To withdraw pursuant to Anders, counsel must: 1) petition the court for leave to withdraw stating that, after making a conscientious examination of the record, counsel has determined that the appeal would be frivolous; 2) furnish a copy of the [Anders] brief to the [appellant]; and 3) advise the [appellant] that he or she has the right to retain private

2017Commonwealth v. Bennett, 124 A.3d 327, 330 (Pa. Super. 2015).

2016S67007/16 the sentence imposed at that hearing.” Commonwealth v. Hyland, 875 A.2d 1175, 1183 (Pa.Super. 2005), appeal denied, 890 A.2d 1057 (Pa. 2005), citing Commonwealth v. Mann, 820 A.2d 788, 794 (Pa.Super. 2003), appeal denied, 831 A.2d 599 (Pa. 2003).

2016Appellant was represented by counsel from the Public Defender’s Office, which has continued to represent Appellant in this appeal. 4 See Pa.R.A.P. 1925(c)(4) (“In a criminal case, counsel may file of record and serve on the judge a statement of intent to file an Anders/McClendon brief in lieu of filing a Statement.”). -5- J-S53035-16 Commonwealth v. Garang, 9 A.3d 237, 240 (Pa. Super. 2010) (citation omitted). [T]he three requirements that counsel must meet before he or she is permitted to withdraw from representation [are] as follows: First, counsel must petition the court for leave to withdr

2016Id. (citations and footnote omitted).

2016Counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders/MClendon, as well as Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009); see also Commonwealth v. Daniels, 999 A.2d 590, 593 (Pa. Super. 2010). -2- J-S18018-16 in the custody of the Agency.

2016S67007/16 the sentence imposed at that hearing.” Commonwealth v. Hyland, 875 A.2d 1175, 1183 (Pa.Super. 2005), appeal denied, 890 A.2d 1057 (Pa. 2005), citing Commonwealth v. Mann, 820 A.2d 788, 794 (Pa.Super. 2003), appeal denied, 831 A.2d 599 (Pa. 2003).

2008While counsel included a “concise statement” within his Anders/McClendon brief filed with this Court on April 4, 2008, and referencing the discretionary aspects of sentencing pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f), the introduction of a concise statement at this juncture was insufficient to comply with the requirements of Rule 1925. ¶ 15 For this Court to properly conduct an appellate review, all necessary materials must be contained within the record. “[A]n appellate court is limited to considering only the materials in the certified record when resolving an issue.” Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1

2008While counsel included a “concise statement” within his Anders/McClendon brief filed with this Court on April 4, 2008, and referencing the discretionary aspects of sentencing pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f), the introduction of a concise statement at this juncture was insufficient to comply with the requirements of Rule 1925. ¶ 15 For this Court to properly conduct an appellate review, all necessary materials must be contained within the record. “[A]n appellate court is limited to considering only the materials in the certified record when resolving an issue.” Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1

2008Additionally, “It is black letter law in this jurisdiction that an appellate court cannot consider anything which is not part of the record in the case.” Commonwealth v. Martz, 926 A.2d 514, 524-525 (Pa.Super.2007), citing Commonwealth v. Boyd, 451 Pa.Super. 404 , 679 A.2d 1284, 1290 (1996).

2008Additionally, “It is black letter law in this jurisdiction that an appellate court cannot consider anything which is not part of the record in the case.” Commonwealth v. Martz, 926 A.2d 514, 524-525 (Pa.Super.2007), citing Commonwealth v. Boyd, 451 Pa.Super. 404 , 679 A.2d 1284, 1290 (1996).

2008Additionally, “It is black letter law in this jurisdiction that an appellate court cannot consider anything which is not part of the record in the case.” Commonwealth v. Martz, 926 A.2d 514, 524-525 (Pa.Super.2007), citing Commonwealth v. Boyd, 451 Pa.Super. 404 , 679 A.2d 1284, 1290 (1996).

2008While counsel included a “concise statement” within his Anders/McClendon brief filed with this Court on April 4, 2008, and referencing the discretionary aspects of sentencing pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f), the introduction of a concise statement at this juncture was insufficient to comply with the requirements of Rule 1925. ¶ 15 For this Court to properly conduct an appellate review, all necessary materials must be contained within the record. “[A]n appellate court is limited to considering only the materials in the certified record when resolving an issue.” Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1

2008While counsel included a “concise statement” within his Anders/McClendon brief filed with this Court on April 4, 2008, and referencing the discretionary aspects of sentencing pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f), the introduction of a concise statement at this juncture was insufficient to comply with the requirements of Rule 1925. ¶ 15 For this Court to properly conduct an appellate review, all necessary materials must be contained within the record. “[A]n appellate court is limited to considering only the materials in the certified record when resolving an issue.” Commonwealth v. Preston, 904 A.2d 1