Com. v. Carlson, C. (judgment order)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S20004-16 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. CHARLES E. CARLSON, III Appellant No. 106 WDA 2015 Appeal from the PCRA Order December 22, 2014 In the Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-04-CR-0002338-1999 BEFORE: PANELLA, J., OLSON, J., and PLATT, J.* JUDGMENT ORDER BY PANELLA, J. FILED APRIL 15, 2016 On August 17, 2012, Carlson filed a petition pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), asserting that the mandatory life sentences that he was serving had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States in Miller v. Alabama, 132 S.Ct. 2455 (2012). It is undisputed that Carlson was under age 18 at the time he committed the murders for which he received life sentences. See Appellee’s Brief, at 1. The PCRA court deferred action on Carlson’s petition pending the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s decision in Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 81 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2013). ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S20004-16 After the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that Miller was not an avenue of relief on collateral review, the PCRA court denied Carlson’s petition. This timely appeal followed. While this appeal was pending, the Supreme Court of the United States held, in Montgomery v. Louisiana, 136 S.Ct. 718 (2016), that Miller was retroactive and provided a remedy on collateral review. Montgomery therefore overruled Cunningham. As a result, we reverse the PCRA court’s order dismissing Carlson’s petition, vacate the judgment of sentence, and remand for re-sentencing pursuant to Miller and Montgomery. Order reversed. Judgment of sentence vacated. resentencing. Jurisdiction relinquished. Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 4/15/2016 -2- Case remanded for
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.
