Jones claim in Pennsylvania

2018In the alternative, he argued that Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (holding mandatory life without parole sentences imposed on juveniles are unconstitutional), Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2015) (determining Miller applies retroactively during collateral proceedings), and Alleyne v. United States 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013) (holding disputed facts that support the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence must be submitted to a jury for determination), constitute newly recognized rights sufficient to qualify for an exception to the PCRA’s time bar. -2- J-S29015-18 The argument sec

2015On November 17, 2014, Jones filed a pro se petition titled, “Motion to Reopen and Vacate Order/Sentence,” claiming that his sentence was unconstitutional based upon the holdings in Alleyne v. U.S., 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013)3 and Commonwealth v. Newman, 99 A.3d 86 (Pa. Super. 2014).4 On January 28, 2015, the trial court denied Jones’ motion, concluding that Jones had filed an insufficient pleading pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5505, and even if Jones’ pleading was sufficient, it would be denied as the decisions in Alleyne and Newman were not to be applied retroactively in cases on collateral review.

2025Id. at 456 .

2025The parties filed a “Limited Joint Stipulation” stating, “the parties agree that the video was not formally admitted into evidence at trial and that [Jones] does not waive his contention that the video cannot be considered in ruling on the sufficiency of the evidence.” Id. at 456 n.2.10 10 The “Limited Joint Stipulation,” purporting to preserve Jones’s claim that the Commonwealth did not properly admit the surveillance video, does not alter our conclusion in the instant appeal that the Commonwealth preserved its challenge to the video.

1980In Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 (1973), the Court restated the Alderman, supra, rule that Fourth Amendment rights are personal and adopted as an exception to that rule a decision in an earlier Supreme Court opinion, Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 , 80 S.Ct. 725 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 (1960), where the Court held that standing is automatic “where the possession needed to establish standing is an element of the offense charged.” Brown, supra, 411 U.S. at 227 , 93 S.Ct. at 1568 (quoting from Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 , 88 S.Ct. 967 , 19 L.Ed.2d

1980In Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223 , 93 S.Ct. 1565 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208 (1973), the Court restated the Alderman, supra, rule that Fourth Amendment rights are personal and adopted as an exception to that rule a decision in an earlier Supreme Court opinion, Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 , 80 S.Ct. 725 , 4 L.Ed.2d 697 (1960), where the Court held that standing is automatic “where the possession needed to establish standing is an element of the offense charged.” Brown, supra, 411 U.S. at 227 , 93 S.Ct. at 1568 (quoting from Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 , 88 S.Ct. 967 , 19 L.Ed.2d

2025Pollard, supra. Under these facts, Jones’ claim that plea counsel was ineffective fails.

2025IV, which would not be applicable to Jones’s claim. 5 In addition to his constitutional claims, in the earlier complaints, Jones also had asserted a claim for professional/simple negligence, as well as a claim under Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978).

2025Burkett, supra. Order affirmed.

2024We cannot reach the merits of Jones’ appeal because Jones’ brief fails to comply with the briefing requirements set forth in Pa.R.A.P. 2111-2135, thus impeding our review. “[B]riefs must conform materially to the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, and this Court may quash or dismiss an appeal if the defect in the brief is substantial.” ____________________________________________ 2 Commonwealth v. Grazier, 713 A.2d 81 (Pa. 1998). -2- J-S09007-24 Commonwealth v. Tchirkow, 160 A.3d 798, 804 (Pa. Super. 2017) (citation omitted); see Pa.R.A.P. 2101 (if the brief of the

2024“Our scope of review is plenary, and we may review the entire record.” Goodco Mech., Inc, 291 A.3d at 405 . - 43 - J-A26021-23 First, Jones’s claim that the court failed to consider the sentencing guidelines is belied by the record.

2022Spotz, supra. Finally, we reject Jones’ disagreement with the PCRA court’s conclusion that “if prejudice did occur, however, it was based upon the unforeseen death of the [Complainant], and not based on any conduct of” Attorney Landis.

2021Applying these pronouncements to Jones’ claim that salt on the train platform constituted a dangerous condition, the Court concluded that it did not satisfy the real estate exception because she failed to allege that “the salt derived or originated from or had as its source the train platform itself.” Id. at 444 .

2021Although the test is cast in objective terms, absent empirical proofs, there remains substantial room for reasonable disagreement concerning how such a hypothetical person might feel in any given set of circumstances.” Luczki, 212 A.3d at 544 (citing Commonwealth v. Au, 42 A.3d 1002 , 1007 (Pa. ____________________________________________ 9 Because the Hicks Court explicitly limited its holding to seizures based upon possession of a concealed firearm, Hicks does not control the outcome of Jones’s claim.

2021Although the test is cast in objective terms, absent empirical proofs, there remains substantial room for reasonable disagreement concerning how such a hypothetical person might feel in any given set of circumstances.” Luczki, 212 A.3d at 544 (citing Commonwealth v. Au, 42 A.3d 1002, 1007 (Pa. ____________________________________________ 9 Because the Hicks Court explicitly limited its holding to seizures based upon possession of a concealed firearm, Hicks does not control the outcome of Jones’s claim.

2021Hernandez, supra. We likewise lack authority to address the merits of Jones’ claim. -9-

2018Jones invoked a line of decisions that began with Broxie v. Household Finance Company , 472 Pa. 373 , 372 A.2d 741 (1977).

2018Jones invoked a line of decisions that began with Broxie v. Household Finance Company , 472 Pa. 373 , 372 A.2d 741 (1977).

2018In the alternative, he argued that Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) (holding mandatory life without parole sentences imposed on juveniles are unconstitutional), Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2015) (determining Miller applies retroactively during collateral proceedings), and Alleyne v. United States 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013) (holding disputed facts that support the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence must be submitted to a jury for determination), constitute newly recognized rights sufficient to qualify for an exception to the PCRA’s time bar. -2- J-S29015-18 The argument sec

2018See Miller, 567 U.S. at 465 ; Montgomery, 136 S.Ct. at 736 .