Post-Conviction Relief Litigation

The second method of challenging an unjust conviction or sentence imposed in Pennsylvania is through the Post Conviction Relief Act, or the PCRA. To be eligible for relief under the PCRA, a petitioner must establish that they are presently serving a sentence for crimes committed in violation of Pennsylvania law, that their conviction and/or sentence resulted from one or more errors or defects specifically enumerated by the PCRA, and that the at-issue error or defect has not and could not have been previously litigated.

The PCRA has strict and inflexible jurisdictional deadlines and generally requires that PCRA petitions be filed within one year of the time a judgment of sentence becomes final (at the conclusion of direct appeal) or within one year of the time new information which would have impacted the outcome of the case is discovered. Unfortunately, there is no recourse available to a person when an inexperienced, inattentive or disinterested attorney blows one of these deadlines - no matter how meritorious the post-conviction claim may be. Thus, it is absolutely essential to find an attorney with a deep understanding of the intricate statutory scheme governing post-conviction relief petitions who will ensure that your rights, or the rights of your loved one, are protected.

Some of the most common claims litigated in the post-conviction context include claims that a petitioner’s attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

Ineffective assistance of counsel can take many forms, but often includes claims that the trial attorney

• failed to litigate necessary pretrial motions.

• failed to conduct a complete investigation of the Commonwealth’s allegations.

• failed to expose the biases, lack of credibility and motives to lie of key Commonwealth witnesses through questioning on cross-examination.

• failed to call character witnesses concerning a person’s reputation in the community for being law abiding, peaceable, non-violent and honest.

• failed to request that the jury be instructed on important principles of law or ensure that the jury received complete and accurate instructions.

• failing to investigate and call witnesses who would have supported the defense or who would have cast doubt upon the Commonwealth’s evidence.

• failing to identify and present necessary expert testimony.

• failing to object to the Commonwealth’s efforts to introduce irrelevant or unduly prejudicial evidence.

The PCRA also allows a convicted individual to collaterally attack their conviction by showing that either their conviction or sentence resulted from a violation of the Pennsylvania or United States Constitution, that an innocent person was unlawfully induced to plead guilty, that the government improperly obstructed a person’s right to appeal a properly preserved and meritorious issue, and where new, exculpatory evidence has been discovered.

If you or someone close to you has been unsuccessful on direct appeal and wants to keep fighting their conviction or sentence, do not delay in contacting the Law Offices of Stephanie M. Noel.