Com. v. Bukovinsky, P.
This text of Com. v. Bukovinsky, P. (Com. v. Bukovinsky, P.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
J-A18023-20
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : PAUL J. BUKOVINSKY, II : : Appellant : No. 1661 WDA 2019
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered October 9, 2019 In the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-63-SA-0000269-2019
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DUBOW, J., and NICHOLS, J.
JUDGMENT ORDER BY DUBOW, J.: FILED JULY 1, 2020
Appellant, Paul J. Bukovinsky, II, appeals pro se from the October 9,
2019 Judgment of Sentence entered in the Washington County Court of
Common Pleas following his conviction of Operating a Vehicle Without Official
Certificate of Inspection, 75 Pa.C.S. § 4703(a). After careful review, we affirm
Appellant’s Judgment of Sentence.
Briefly, on August 28, 2019, the magistrate convicted Appellant of the
above crime. Appellant appealed from his summary conviction and, on
October 9, 2019, the trial court again found Appellant guilty. The court
sentenced Appellant to pay the costs of prosecution and a $25 fine.
This timely appeal followed. On November 18, 2019, the trial court
entered an Order directing Appellant to file of record and concurrently serve
the trial judge with a Concise Statement of the Matters Complained of on
Appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925 within 21 days of entry of the Order. J-A18023-20
Order, 11/18/19. Appellant did not file a Rule 1925(b) Statement as ordered
by the trial court.
Rather, on December 9, 2019, Appellant served the trial judge with his
“Brief of Appellant,” which the trial court treated as a Rule 1925(b) Statement.
Trial Ct. Op., 12/11/19, at 3. However, Appellant did not file this “Brief” with
the trial court clerk and it is not in the certified record. Id.
Pa.R.A.P 1925(b)(1) requires that, when the trial court orders an
appellant to file a Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement, “the appellant shall file of
record the Statement and concurrently shall serve the judge.” Pa.R.A.P.
1925(b)(1) (emphasis added).
It is well-settled that “[n]on-compliance with Rule 1925(b)(1) . . . shall
result in [the] automatic waiver of all appellate issues.” Commonwealth v.
Eldred, 207 A.3d 404, 407 (Pa. Super. 2019). See Commonwealth v. Lord,
719 A.2d 306, 309 (Pa. 1998) (“[I]n order to preserve their claims for
appellate review, [a]ppellants must comply whenever the trial court orders
them to file a Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal pursuant to Rule
1925.”).
Because Appellant did not file his Rule 1925(b) Statement with the lower
court clerk, Appellant has not complied with Rule 1925(b)(1). Thus, Appellant
has waived his issues on appeal.
Judgment of Sentence affirmed.
-2- J-A18023-20
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary
Date: 7/1/2020
-3-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Com. v. Bukovinsky, P., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/com-v-bukovinsky-p-pasuperct-2020.