Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-1329-2004 COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : vs. : CP-21-CR-1329-2004 : CP-21-CR-2629-2003 : GILBERT ARTEAGA : IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925 Following a jury trial, on September 8, 2004, Defendant Gilbert Huerta Arteaga was convicted of Robbery, Theft by Unlawful Taking, and Simple Assault. On February 4, 2005, Defendant was sentenced to pay costs, make restitution of $2,570.00 to Waypoint Bank, and to undergo imprisonment in a state correctional facility for 6-12 years, a sentence to be imposed consecutively with his sentence of CR 2629-2003. On April 12, 2010, we entered an order denying the Defendant’s request for discovery. We were, and continue to be, mystified by the Defendant’s discovery request as there is nothing pending at this docket. The Defendant has filed an appeal from our April 12, 2010 order. On May 14, 2010, in accordance with Rule 1925 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, the undersigned entered an order directing the appellant to file, within twenty-one (21) days, and to serve the undersigned with a copy of, a concise statement of the matters complained of on appeal. (Order, In Re: Appeal of Defendant, May 14, 2010). The aforementioned order warned that any issue not properly included in the statement pursuant to Rule 1925(b) would be deemed waived. Id. As of this date, Defendant has not filed a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal. It is well established that an appellant who fails to file a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal, pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b), will have waived any issues associated with that appeal. Commonwealth v. Carpenter, 2008 Pa. Super. 186, ¶ 15, 955 CP-21-CR-1329-2004 CP-21-CR-2629-2003 A.2d 411, 415 (citing Commonwealth v. Lord, 553 Pa. 415, 420, 719 A.2d 306, 309 (1998)); Pa. R.A.P., Rule 1925(b)(4)(vii). Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(b) provides, in pertinent part, as follows: (b) Direction to file statement of errors complained of on appeal; instructions to -- the appellant and the trial court.If the judge entering the order giving rise to the notice of appeal (“judge”) desires clarification of the errors complained of on appeal, the judge may enter an order directing the appellant to file of record in the trial court and serve on the judge a concise statement of the errors complained of on appeal (“Statement”). . . . (b)(4)(vii) Issues not included in the Statement and/or not raised in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph (b)(4) are waived. In Comm. v. Lord, supra, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that when a court orders an appellant to file a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal in accordance with Rule 1925(b), any issues not contained in that statement will be deemed waived. Comm. v. Lord, 553 Pa. at 420. The concise statement is an important element of the appellate process because it gives the trial court the ability to draft an opinion which will aid the appellate court in conducting a meaningful and effective review. Commonwealth v. Lemon, 2002 Pa. Super. 234, ¶ 6, 804 A.2d 34, 36-37. The absence of a trial court opinion creates a severe hindrance to an effective review process. Id. Therefore, “Pa.R.A.P.1925 is intended to aid trial judges in identifying and focusing upon those issues which the parties plan to raise on appeal. Rule 1925 is thus a crucial component of the appellate process.” Id. (citing Comm. v. Lord, 553 Pa. at 417). Furthermore, “[w]hen the trial court has to guess what issues an appellant is appealing, that is not enough for meaningful review.” Commonwealth v. Dowling, 778 A.2d 683, 686 (Pa.Super. 2001). 2 CP-21-CR-1329-2004 CP-21-CR-2629-2003 Courts have consistently held that an appellant who fails to file a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal, after having been directed to do so, waives any issues associated with that appeal. See Comm. v. Lord, 533 Pa. at 417; Cobbs v. SEPTA, 2009 Pa. Super. 221, ¶ 17, 985 A.2d 249, 255-56 (“. . .[I]ssue was not included in Cobbs's statement of matters complained of on appeal; therefore, it is waived.”); Southcentral Employment Corp. v. Birmingham Fire Ins. Co. of Pa., 926 A.2d 977, 983 n. 5 (Pa.Super.2007) (holding that issue not raised in statement of matters complained of on appeal is waived for purposes of appeal); Commonwealth v. Carpenter, 2008 Pa. Super. 186, ¶ 15 (“It is well established that an appellant's failure to include claims in the court-ordered 1925(b) statement will result in a waiver of that issue on appeal.”). Defendant/Appellant Arteaga failed to file any concise statement in connection with his appeal of the order denying a request for discovery, despite having been so directed by the undersigned judge. (Order, In Re: Appeal of Defendant, May 14, 2010). The twenty-one day time period having passed, any issues Defendant/Appellant may have in connection with the aforementioned appeal are deemed waived. August 12, 2010 _____________________________ Kevin A. Hess, P. J. Matthew P. Smith, Esquire Chief Deputy District Attorney Gilbert Arteaga GC 3018 SCI Somerset 1600 Walter Mill Road Somerset, PA 15510-0005 :rlm 3