Com. v. Gates, K.
This text of Com. v. Gates, K. (Com. v. Gates, K.) 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-S55011-20
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : KEIYAUVE ROBERT MONTREL GATES : : Appellant : No. 297 WDA 2020
Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered January 27, 2020 In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-25-CR-0001534-2018
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : KEIYAUVE ROBERT MONTREL GATES : : Appellant : No. 298 WDA 2020
Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered January 27, 2020 In the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-25-CR-0001632-2018
BEFORE: BOWES, J., McCAFFERY, J., and COLINS, J.*
MEMORANDUM BY BOWES, J.: FILED: MARCH 5, 2021
Keiyauve Robert Montrel Gates appeals from the order denying his
petition for relief filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”). We
order the transcription of the relevant notes of testimony.
____________________________________________
* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S55011-20
Appellant’s convictions stem from two separate incidents, a burglary and
a shooting. Appellant entered a guilty plea at both cases. For the shooting,
Appellant pled guilty to attempted homicide and carrying a firearm without a
license. For the burglary, Appellant pled guilty to theft by unlawful taking and
criminal trespass. Appellant was sentenced at both cases to an aggregate
term of thirteen to twenty-seven years of incarceration. A post-sentence
motion was denied.
On July 8, 2019, Appellant filed a timely pro se PCRA petition alleging
that trial counsel had failed to file a requested direct appeal and seeking the
reinstatement of his direct appeal rights nunc pro tunc. Appointed PCRA
counsel requested the transcription of the guilty plea and sentencing
transcripts, before filing a supplemental PCRA petition specifying that
Appellant had asked trial counsel at sentencing to file a direct appeal and
requesting a hearing so that trial counsel could have a chance to respond.
The Commonwealth filed a response agreeing that an evidentiary hearing was
necessary in order to resolve this issue.
On November 19, 2019, the PCRA court held an evidentiary hearing, at
which Appellant and trial counsel testified.1 On January 27, 2020, the PCRA
court issued an order and opinion denying the PCRA petition, finding
1 A transcript from this hearing has not been included in the certified record on appeal. However, both parties agree that Appellant and trial counsel testified at the hearing.
-2- J-S55011-20
Appellant’s testimony that he told counsel to file a direct appeal was
“contradictory” and “self-serving.” Order, 1/27/20, at 3. Instead, the court
credited the “consistent” testimony of trial counsel that he filed the only post-
sentence motion that Appellant requested. Id. at 5. These appeals followed.2
Appellant argues that the court erred in denying PCRA relief. See
Appellant’s brief at 2. Appellant, however, never requested that the
transcripts from this specific proceeding be prepared. Although PCRA counsel
submitted an “order for transcript” with both of his direct appeals, the orders
do not request the transcription of any specific hearing. See Order for
Transcript, 2/26/20. Our informal inquiries by the Western District
Prothonotary’s office have confirmed that the PCRA hearing was never
transcribed.
While Appellant did request a transcript with his notice of appeal, he
failed to specify which transcript he was requesting. As a result, the PCRA
hearing was never transcribed and was not included in the certified record.
Its absence thwarts our ability to review the merits of his claim. However,
because counsel did submit a request for transcripts and we “may take such
action as [we] deem appropriate” in this situation, we decline to find the issue
waived. Pa.R.A.P. 1911(d). Instead, we direct the PCRA court to order the
transcription of the November 19, 2019 PCRA hearing within thirty days. Once
2 We consolidated the appeals sua sponte.
-3- J-S55011-20
the hearing has been transcribed, the PCRA court should submit the transcript
as a supplemental record pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1926(b)(1).
Jurisdiction retained.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary
Date: 3/5/2021
-4-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Com. v. Gates, K., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/com-v-gates-k-pasuperct-2021.