Com. v. Simms, D. (judgment order)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S61034-17 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. DAVID E. SIMMS, Appellant No. 961 EDA 2017 Appeal from the PCRA Order February 22, 2017 in the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County Criminal Division at Nos.: CP-15-CR-0004169-2009 CP-15-CR-0004328-2009 BEFORE: LAZARUS, J., RANSOM, J., and PLATT, J.* JUDGMENT ORDER BY PLATT, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 28, 2017 Appellant, David E. Simms, appeals pro se from the order dismissing his petition for relief pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-9546. We affirm. Appellant asserts PCRA court error in dismissing his petition, which claimed that he received a constitutionally invalid mandatory minimum sentence. (See Appellant’s Brief, at 9-20). We review the grant or denial of PCRA relief to determine whether the court’s decision is supported by the record and free of legal error. For legal questions, our standard of review is de novo, and our scope of review is ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S61034-17 plenary. See Commonwealth v. Burton, 158 A.3d 618, 627 n.13 (Pa. 2017). This case returns to us after remand for the PCRA court to appoint counsel.1 (See PCRA Court Opinion, 5/12/17, at unnumbered page 2; see also Commonwealth v. Simms, No. 89 EDA 2016, 2016 WL 5845389, at *1 (Pa. Super. filed Aug. 30, 2016) (unpublished judgment order)).2 Briefly, Appellant entered a negotiated plea to two counts of robbery and one count of fleeing or attempting to elude, receiving the agreed aggregate sentence of not less than twelve nor more than thirty years’ incarceration in a state correctional institution. (See N.T. Sentencing, 8/02/10, at 9-10, 12; see also Guilty Plea Colloquy, 8/02/10, at unnumbered page 3). Appellant received the negotiated sentence, not a mandatory minimum sentence. (See PCRA Ct. Op., at unnumbered page 3). The record is devoid of any indication to the contrary. The PCRA court’s decision is supported by the record and free of legal error. Moreover, on review, we find no other claims which would merit PCRA relief. Order affirmed. ____________________________________________ 1 The court appointed counsel but subsequently granted his petition to withdraw after he filed a “no merit” letter. See Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988); Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (en banc). 2 We respectfully refer the reader to that order for more history of this case. -2- J-S61034-17 Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 11/28/2017 -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.
