Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Donnetta Hill, Appellant

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the PCRA court's order dismissing Donnetta Hill's guilt-phase PCRA claims, but on waiver grounds rather than the merits: because her counsel never filed a court-ordered Rule 1925(b) statement despite an extension to April 30, 2007, all fifteen guilt-phase claims were automatically waived under the bright-line rule of Lord and its progeny, and neither alleged ex parte contacts with the PCRA court's chambers nor the filed Jurisdictional Statement constituted compliance. The Court declined the Commonwealth's reciprocal request to remove the Federal Defender and remand under amended Rule 1925(c)(3) or a West-type procedure, holding that the pre-amendment 1988 version of Rule 1925 controlled this September 2006 appeal and that such remands are confined to the direct-appeal context. Justice Saylor, joined by Justice Todd, dissented, contending that a limited remand should determine whether counsel substantially complied and that Lord's rigid waiver rule should not impair the single round of post-conviction review.