Com. v. Coffey, J. (judgment order)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S37035-16 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. JEROME TERRY COFFEY Appellant No. 1715 WDA 2015 Appeal from the PCRA Order October 8, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Forest County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-27-CR-0000067-2011 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., SHOGAN, J., and LAZARUS, J. JUDGMENT ORDER BY LAZARUS, J.: FILED APRIL 28, 2016 Jerome Terry Coffey, an inmate at SCI-Houtzdale, appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Forest County that dismissed his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act.1 After careful review, we affirm. On September 17, 2012, the trial court convicted Coffey of disorderly conduct based on an incident that occurred while he was an inmate at SCIForest. The court imposed a fine of $100.00 plus costs of prosecution. Coffey filed an appeal of his judgment of sentence, which this Court affirmed. Commonwealth v. Coffey, 87 A.3d 873 (Pa. Super. 2013). Coffey then filed a petition for allowance of appeal, which our Supreme Court ____________________________________________ 1 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-9546. J-S37035-16 denied on April 14, 2014. Commonwealth v. Coffey, 89 A.3d 659 (Pa. 2014). On April 6, 2015, Coffey filed a PCRA petition, which the court dismissed on October 8, 2015. He then filed a timely appeal to this Court. Section 9543(a)(1)(i) of the PCRA provides that to be eligible for relief, a petitioner must plead and prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he has been convicted of a crime under the laws of this Commonwealth and that at the time relief is granted he is currently serving a sentence of imprisonment, probation or parole for the crime. 42 Pa.C.S. § 9543(a)(1)(i). Because Coffey is not serving a sentence for the offense of disorderly conduct, he is not eligible for relief under the PCRA. See Commonwealth v. Fisher, 703 A.2d 714 (Pa. Super. 1997) (PCRA precludes relief for petitioners whose only sentence is a fine). Order affirmed.2 Judgment Entered. ____________________________________________ 2 On March 23, 2016, Coffey filed a “Motion to Stop Mail Room Supervisor from Opening Legal Mail Outside Petitioner’s Presents [sic].” We dismiss the motion for lack of jurisdiction. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 741 (original jurisdiction of Superior Court) and 42 Pa.C.S. § 742 (Superior Court jurisdiction over appeals from courts of common pleas). -2- J-S37035-16 Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 4/28/2016 -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.
