Com. v. Lim, G. (memorandum)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

J-S64012-13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. GI SEONG LIM, Appellant No. 109 EDA 2013 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of November 13, 2012 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-46-CR-0002485-2012 BEFORE: GANTMAN, DONOHUE AND OLSON, JJ. JUDGMENT ORDER BY OLSON, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 27, 2013 Appellant, Gi Seong Lim, appeals pro se from the judgment of sentence entered on November 13, 2012. We quash the appeal. On November 13, 2012, Appellant, who was represented by counsel, pled guilty to driving under the influence- highest rate of alcohol.1 He was immediately sentenced to three days to six months imprisonment. As part of the written guilty plea colloquy, Appellant acknowledged his understanding that any appeal must be filed within 30 days.2 Appellant filed ____________________________________________ 1 2 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(c). The transcript of the change of plea and sentencing hearing is not in the certified record. J-S64012-13 the instant notice of appeal on January 1, 2013.3 On January 30, 2013, we issued an order to show cause why this appeal should not be quashed as being untimely.4 Appellant filed a timely response thereto and the issue was referred to this panel. The judgment of sentence in this case was entered on November 13, 2012. Appellant did not file an appeal within 30 days after the entry of the judgment of sentence. See Pa.R.A.P. 903(a) (notice of appeal shall be filed within 30 days after entry of order from which appeal is taken). Rather, Appellant filed his appeal on January 1, 2013, 49 days after the judgment of sentence was entered. In his response to the order to show cause, Appellant makes no cognizable argument as to why we can consider his appeal, instead making general references about the unfairness of the sentence imposed. As this appeal is patently untimely, we lack jurisdiction to consider it. See Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 934 A.2d 1287, 1289- 1290 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citation omitted). Appeal quashed. ____________________________________________ 3 See Commonwealth v. Feliciano, 69 A.3d 1270, 1274 (Pa. Super. 2013) (prisoner mailbox rule). 4 Our order to show cause incorrectly stated that the notice of appeal was filed on January 4, 2013, the date it was received. -2- J-S64012-13 Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 11/27/2013 -3-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.