Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Appellant v. Shawn Lamar Burton, Appellee

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that the presumption that information of public record cannot be deemed 'unknown' for purposes of the newly-discovered facts exception to the PCRA time-bar, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(b)(1)(ii), does not apply to pro se petitioners who are incarcerated, and it affirmed the Superior Court's order remanding Burton's second PCRA petition for an evidentiary hearing. Applying the Statutory Construction Act's plain-meaning approach, the Court reasoned that the statute requires only that the predicate facts be 'unknown to the petitioner,' that the presumption originated in an unanalyzed footnote in Lark and was extended only to counseled petitioners in Whitney, Chester, and Taylor, and that Bennett's implicit access rationale, together with documented limitations on prisoner access to public records, justified eliminating—but not reallocating—the presumption for pro se prisoners. The Court directed PCRA courts to first determine whether the facts were unknown to the petitioner (holding a hearing if needed) and only then assess due diligence, including access to public records. Chief Justice Saylor joined the majority but reiterated his objection to Bennett's decoupling of 'facts' from 'claims'; Justice Baer, joined by Justice Dougherty, dissented, viewing the per se pro se exemption as unsupported by the record and contrary to stare decisis, and would have reinstated the PCRA court's dismissal.