Com. v. Smith, R. (judgment order)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S16011-13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. RYAN JOSEPH SMITH Appellant No. 354 EDA 2012 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence December 1, 2011 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-46-CR-0000088-2010; CP-46-CR-0004755-2010; CP-46-CR-0006669-2009 BEFORE: GANTMAN, J., OLSON, J., and PLATT, J.* JUDGMENT ORDER BY GANTMAN, J.: FILED MAY 03, 2013 Appellant, Ryan Joseph Smith, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, following the revocation of his probation and parole. On Tuesday, January 3, 2012, Appellant timely filed a pro se notice of appeal, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.1 As a general rule, ineffective assistance of counsel claims should be deferred until proceedings under the Post Conviction Relief Act ( PCRA ) at 42 Pa.C.S.A. ยงยง 9541-9546. See generally Commonwealth v. Grant, ____________________________________________ 1 New Year s Day fell on Sunday; Monday, January 2, 2012, was the court holiday. In addition, Appellant has knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to counsel. (See N.T. Hearing, 7/6/12, at 2-13.) _____________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S16011-13 572 Pa. 48, 813 A.2d 726 (2002) and its progeny. Likewise, this Court will not entertain ineffective assistance of counsel claims on direct appeal unless the defendant makes a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of PCRA review. Commonwealth v. Barnett, 25 A.3d 371 (Pa.Super. 2011) (en banc). Instantly, ineffectiveness. Appellant s issues deal with counsel s alleged Appellant, however, did not develop any record on his claims before the trial court and waive his right to PCRA review. See id. Thus, we decline to address those claims on direct appeal. 2 Instead, Appellant will have to raise his ineffectiveness of counsel claims in a timely PCRA petition. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of sentence. Judgment of sentence affirmed. Judgment Entered. Prothonotary Date: 5/3/2013 ____________________________________________ 2 Due to our disposition, we deny Appellant s petition for relief. -2-

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.