Com. v. Twyman, C.

• Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
• Decided: October 10, 2025
• Docket: 1734 MDA 2024
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

J-S26041-25

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : CHRISTOPHER J. TWYMAN : : Appellant : No. 1734 MDA 2024

Appeal from the Order Entered November 13, 2024 In the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-06-CR-0003202-2022

BEFORE: LAZARUS, P.J., OLSON, J., and BECK, J.

MEMORANDUM BY BECK, J.: FILED: OCTOBER 10, 2025

Christopher J. Twyman (“Twyman”) appeals pro se from the order

entered by the Berks County Court of Common Pleas dismissing his petition

filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”).1 Because Twyman

is not currently serving a sentence and is therefore ineligible for relief under

the PCRA, we affirm.

On January 22, 2024, Twyman entered a negotiated guilty plea to two

counts of harassment and one count of trespass, all summary offenses. That

same day, the trial court sentenced Twyman to 45 to 90 days of incarceration

for each of the harassment charges, to be served consecutively, for a total of

90 to 180 days, and a consecutive term of 90 days of probation for trespass.

____________________________________________

1 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. J-S26041-25

The trial court provided Twyman with credit for time served of 180 days. He

did not file a direct appeal.

On August 7, 2024, Twyman filed a pro se PCRA petition. Therein, he

claimed his plea counsel provided ineffective assistance by not adequately

informing him that the negotiated plea would interfere with his pending parole

violation. The PCRA court appointed Twyman counsel. Twyman’s PCRA

counsel filed a no-merit letter and a motion to withdraw as counsel. In the

letter, PCRA counsel concluded there was no legal basis for Twyman’s claim

because Twyman was not currently serving a sentence on the docket in

question.

The PCRA court filed a notice of intent to dismiss without a hearing

pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 907. Twyman filed a response, contending that he

had not yet served his probationary sentence because he was currently

serving time for a parole violation on a different docket. Ultimately, the PCRA

court dismissed Twyman’s PCRA petition without a hearing and granted

counsel permission to withdraw. Twyman timely appealed.

Twyman argues in his brief that he is entitled to PCRA relief because his

credit for time served was applied incorrectly to the docket in this case. See

Twyman’s Brief at 4. Without this error, Twyman claims that he would not

yet have served any of his sentence, rendering him eligible for relief. Id.

“Our review of a PCRA court’s decision is limited to examining whether

the PCRA court’s findings of fact are supported by the record, and whether its

-2- J-S26041-25

conclusions of law are free from legal error.” Commonwealth v. Wilson,

273 A.3d 13, 18 (Pa. Super. 2022) (citation omitted). “With respect to the

PCRA court’s legal considerations, we apply a de novo standard of review.”

Commonwealth v. Lopez, 249 A.3d 993, 998 (Pa. 2021) (citation omitted).

To be eligible for relief the petitioner must plead and prove he has been

convicted of a crime under the laws of this Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

and at the time the requested relief is sought, he must be “currently serving

a sentence of imprisonment, probation or parole for the crime[.]” 42 Pa.C.S.

§ 9543(a)(1)(i); see also Commonwealth v. Ahlborn, 699 A.2d 718, 720

(Pa. 1997) (“To be eligible for relief a petitioner must be currently serving a

sentence of imprisonment, probation or parole. To grant relief at a time when

appellant is not currently serving such a sentence would be to ignore the

language of the statute.”) (emphasis in original).

Our review of the record confirms that the trial court sentenced Twyman

on January 22, 2024, to an aggregate term of 90 to 180 days of incarceration,

followed by 90 days of probation, and that it granted him credit for time served

on this docket for the entire 180 days. It ordered his probation sentence to

commence on the date of sentencing. See N.T., 1/22/2024, at 16; Sentencing

Order, 1/22/2024, at 3. Thus, Twyman’s probationary sentence expired on

April 21, 2024.

Therefore, although Twyman has been convicted of crimes under the

laws in this Commonwealth, he is no longer serving any sentence for the

-3- J-S26041-25

crimes on this docket and is ineligible for PCRA relief on that basis. See

Commonwealth v. Turner, 80 A.3d 754, 766 (Pa. 2013) (noting a petitioner

cannot gain relief under the PCRA if their sentence has concluded);

Commonwealth v. Matin, 832 A.2d 1141, 1143 (Pa. Super. 2003) (“A

petitioner is ineligible for relief under the PCRA once the sentence for the

challenged conviction is completed.”). Accordingly, we do not have

jurisdiction to decide the merits of this appeal.

Order affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Benjamin D. Kohler, Esq. Prothonotary

Date: 10/10/2025

-4-