Gilberto Melendez v. Pennsylvania Parole Board

Melendez · Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · March 9, 2023 · No. 929 C.D. 2021

Summary

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed the Pennsylvania Parole Board’s denial of Gilberto Melendez’s administrative appeals and granted appointed counsel’s application to withdraw under Turner/Finley. The court held that Melendez’s challenge to his recommitment as a convicted parole violator was untimely, his challenge to the 2011 denial of credit for time spent at liberty on parole was both untimely and waived, and the Board’s denial of reparole was not subject to appellate review.

Holdings

  1. Appointed counsel satisfied the technical Turner/Finley requirements, and the court's independent review confirmed that Melendez's appeal lacked merit; counsel was therefore permitted to withdraw.
  2. The Board properly rejected Melendez's administrative challenge to the recommitment order as untimely because it was filed more than thirty days after the order was mailed.
  3. The court lacked jurisdiction to consider the challenge because it was facially untimely, and the issue was also waived because Melendez did not raise it before the Board or in his petition for review.
  4. The Board's denial of reparole was not subject to appellate review or administrative relief because a parole-denial decision is not an adjudication.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether appointed counsel satisfied the Turner/Finley requirements for withdrawal and whether the appeal lacked merit.
  2. Whether the Board properly rejected as untimely Melendez's challenge to the recommitment order and imposition of backtime.
  3. Whether Melendez could obtain review of the Board's 2011 determination denying credit for time spent at liberty on parole.
  4. Whether Melendez's challenge to the recommitment order was waived because it was not properly raised before the Board or in the petition for review.
  5. Whether the Board's denial of reparole was subject to appellate or administrative review.
  6. Whether the Board's treatment of the recommitment and out-of-state charges violated procedural due process or other constitutional rights.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (10)

  • Commonwealth v. Turner, 544 A.2d 927 (Pa. 1988)(applied)
  • Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa. Super. 1988) (en banc)(applied)
  • Zerby v. Shanon, 964 A.2d 956, 960 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009)(applied)
  • Young v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 189 A.3d 16, 18 n.3 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2018)(applied)
  • Wagner v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole, 522 A.2d 155, 157 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987)(applied)
  • McCullough v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 256 A.3d 466, 471 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2021)(applied)
  • Smith v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 81 A.3d 1091, 1094 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013)(applied)
  • McCaskill v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 631 A.2d 1092, 1094-95 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1993)(applied)
  • Chesson v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 47 A.3d 875, 879 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012)(applied)
  • Rogers v. Pa. Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 724 A.2d 319, 322-23 (Pa. 1999)(applied)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…