Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout96-295 / 96-573 CriminalCOMMONWEALTH THEODORE T. LESLIE IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 96-0295 CRIMINAL TERM NO. 96-0573 CRIMINAL TERM IN RE: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/MODIFICATION OF SENTENCE BEFORE OLER, J. OPINION and ORDER OF COURT OLER, J., September 26, 2003. In these criminal cases, Defendant has filed a "Motion for Reconsideration/Modification of Sentence Nunc-pro-Tunc," requesting that the court reduce a sentence imposed in 1996 for an armed robbery, pursuant to a plea bargain. The bases for the requested reduction are expressed in Defendant's motion as follows: 1) Petitioner has matured since date of offenses. 2) Petitioner has Completed Drug and Alcohol Programming. 3) Petitioner has maintained good Conduct. 4) Petitioner has shown a great deal of Remorse for his Actions 5) Petitioner has Served Over 8 years of incarceration. 6) Petitioner wants to Attend Temple university, incarseration at this point does not Allow him to do So due to lack Of funds. ~ For the reasons stated in this opinion, the motion will be denied. Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration/Modification of Sentence Nunc-pro-Tunc, filed Aug. 6, 2003, at 2. STATEMENT OF FACTS As a consequence of an armed robbery occurring on January 27, 1996, and assaults on prison guards on March 13, 1996, and March 15, 1996, Defendant pled guilty on May 7, 1996, to one count of robbery in violation of Section 3701(a)(1)(ii) of the Crimes Cede2 at No. 96-0295 Crim. T. (Cumberland Co.), a felony of the first degree,3 and two unrelated counts of simple assault in violation of Section 2701(a)(1) efthe Crimes Cede4 at No. 96-0573 Crim. T. (Cumberland Co.), each a misdemeanor of the second degree.5 The pleas were entered pursuant to a plea bargain whereby (a) other charges were not pursued by the Commonwealth, (b) the sentences for the offenses were to run concurrently, (c) the robbery sentence was to be one of not less than 68 months nor more than 136 months in a state correctional institution, and (d) the simple assault sentences were to have minimum terms not exceeding eight menths.6 On May 16, 1996, Defendant was sentenced consistent with the plea bargain.7 No direct appeal from the judgment of sentence was filed by Defendant. The motion to reduce the sentence which is presently before the court was filed by Defendant on August 6, 2003. DISCUSSION In the present case, jurisdiction of the sentencing court to modify Defendant's sentence, in the absence of fraud, mistake or other sufficient legal impropriety, expired thirty days after sentence was imposed. Commonrvealth v. 2 N.T. 15, Guilty Plea Colloquy, May 7, 1996; Act of Dec. 6, 1972, P.L. 1482, 81, as amended, 18 Pa. C.S.A. §3701(a)(1)(ii) (West 2003). 3 Id. at §3701(b). 4 N.T. 15, Guilty Plea Colloquy, May 7, 1996; see Act of Dec. 6, 1972, P.L. 1482, 81, as amended, 18 Pa. C.S.A. §2701(a). 5 Idat §2701(b). 6 N.T. 2-3, Guilty Plea Colloquy, May 7, 1996. 7 Order of Court, May 16, 1996. 2 Walters, 814 A.2d 253 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2002); Act of July 9, amended, 42 Pa. C.S. must be denied. AND NOW, this Defendant's Motion for Tunc, and for the reasons denied. 1976, P.L. 586, §2, as §5505 (West 2003).8 Accordingly, Defendant's motion ORDER OF COURT 26th day of September, 2003, upon consideration of Reconsideration/Modification of Sentence Nunc-pro- stated in the accompanying opinion, the motion is BY THE COURT, Office of the District Attorney Theodore T. Leslie, DA-2348 P.O. Box 999 1120 Pike Street Huntingdon, PA 16652 Defendant, Pro Se s/ J. Wesley Oler, Jr. J. Wesley Oler, Jr., J. 8 The grounds upon which Defendant's motion for modification is based are not of the type which would admit of an exception to the general jurisdictional rule. 3 4 COMMONWEALTH IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Vo THEODORE T. LESLIE NO. 96-0295 CRIMINAL TERM NO. 96-0573 CRIMINAL TERM IN RE: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/MODIFICATION OF SENTENCE BEFORE OLER, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 26th day of September, 2003, upon consideration of Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration/Modification of Sentence Nunc-pro- Tunc, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying opinion, the motion is denied. BY THE COURT, Office of the District Attorney Theodore T. Leslie, DA-2348 P.O. Box 999 1120 Pike Street Huntingdon, PA 16652 Defendant, Pro Se J. Wesley Oler, Jr., J.