HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-SA-0239-2005
COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
vs. : CP-21-SA-0239-2005
:
:
MICHAEL SCHRIM :
IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925
The defendant has filed an appeal from our verdict and sentence following a hearing on a
charge of speeding. Specifically, the defendant was found guilty of traveling forty (40) miles per
hour in a thirty-five (35) mile-per-hour zone and was sentenced to pay a fine of thirty-five
($35.00) dollars. According to the docket entries in this case, a copy of our order was mailed on
th
August 2, 2006. It appears, further, that the defendant paid the fine on August 8. The appeal in
this case was not filed until September 5, 2006.
The appeal in this case is clearly untimely. Pa.R.Crim.P. 720 provides that there “shall
be no post-sentence motion in summary case appeals following a trial de novo in the Court of
Common Pleas.” The rule goes on to provide that the sentencing order in a summary case
constitutes a final order for purposes of appeal. The docket reflects that the defendant received
timely notice of our sentencing order. The rule is otherwise clear that an appeal must be filed
within thirty days of the entry of the order. Accordingly, the appeal of the defendant ought to be
quashed.
October 6, 2006 _____________________________
Kevin A. Hess, J.
Office of District Attorney
Michael Schrim, Pro Se
43 Old Stone House Road
Carlisle, PA 17013