Commonwealth v. Glunt
This text of 61 A.3d 228 (Commonwealth v. Glunt) 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
OPINION BY
This is a pro se appeal from the order which denied Appellant’s pro se “Petition to Vacate/Correct Illegal Sentence. In the Interest of Justice.” We affirm.
In his petition, filed February 23, 2012, Appellant claimed that the length of his 2003 judgment of sentence rendered it illegal.1 The lower court denied the petition as untimely and without legal foundation. In its opinion filed pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 1925(a), the court noted that Appellant had litigated his judgment of sentence in a timely post-sentence motion and in a petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”) and explained that it dismissed the instant petition because “Appellant has no legal authority to now file a Motion to Vacate/Correct Illegal Sentence.” We agree.
As a post-sentence motion, the petition was obviously untimely, see Pa.R.Crim.P. 720(A).2 The lower court had no jurisdiction to grant relief on this petition. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5505. Appellant offers no legal authority or argument to the contrary. Accordingly, we affirm the order denying the petition.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 A.3d 228, 2012 Pa. Super. 269, 2012 Pa. Super. LEXIS 4087, 2012 WL 6139914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-glunt-pasuperct-2012.