Com. v. Bantum, B. (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J -A30044-18 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, I.O.P 65.37 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. BRIAN KURT BANTUM, Appellant No. 1476 WDA 2017 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence August 31, 2017 in the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-07-CR-0002204-2016 SHOGAN, J., KUNSELMAN, J. and STRASSBURGER, J.* BEFORE: FILED AUGUST 05, 2019 MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: Brian Kurt Bantum (Appellant) appeals from the August 31, 2017 judgment of sentence imposed after possess a a jury convicted him of person not to firearm, theft by unlawful taking, receiving stolen property, and disorderly conduct. On January 10, 2019, we remanded this case for (1) the trial court to rule on Appellant's weight -of -the -evidence claim under the correct standard of review; (2) new counsel to be appointed for Appellant; and (3) the inclusion of necessary materials Commonwealth v. Bantum, in A.3d the , certified record. See 2019 WL 156558 (Pa. Super. 2019 (unpublished memorandum). *Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J -A30044-18 On January 15, 2019, the trial court issued a supplemental opinion, appointed new counsel, Attorney Edward Zang,' and ensured the inclusion of necessary materials in the certified record. Attorney Zang has filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 738 U.S. a (1967), brief and (Pa. 2009). Direct appeal counsel seeking to withdraw under Anders must file a petition averring that, after a conscientious examination of the record, counsel finds the appeal to be wholly frivolous. Counsel must also file an Anders brief setting forth issues that might arguably support the appeal along with any other issues necessary for the effective appellate presentation thereof.... copy of the Anders petition and brief to the appellant, advising the appellant of the right to retain new counsel, proceed pro se or raise any additional points worthy of this Court's attention. Anders counsel must also provide a If counsel does not fulfill the aforesaid technical requirements of Anders, this Court will deny the petition to withdraw and remand the case with appropriate instructions (e.g., directing counsel either to comply with Anders or file an advocate's brief on Appellant's behalf). Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717, 720-21 (Pa. Super. 2007) (citations omitted). Upon review, we conclude that counsel has not complied substantially with the technical requirements set forth above because counsel has not filed a petition to withdraw with this Court, provided a copy of said petition to Appellant, or advised Appellant "of the right to retain new counsel, Accordingly, this Court granted Attorney Mark Zearfaus's motion to withdraw as counsel. Per Curiam Order, 3/7/2019. 1 -2 J -A30044-18 proceed pro se or raise any additional points worthy of this Court's attention." Id. at 721. In light of the foregoing, we direct Attorney Zang to file either an advocate's brief or a compliant Anders brief and petition to withdraw, along with an accompanying letter advising Appellant of his rights, within 30 days of this decision. Panel jurisdiction retained. -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.
