J-S54014-19 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : JENS-PETER ENGELUND : : Appellant : No. 479 MDA 2019 Appeal from the PCRA Order Entered March 4, 2019 In the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-14-CR-0002002-2017 BEFORE: BOWES, J., LAZARUS, J., and DUBOW, J. MEMORANDUM BY BOWES, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 12, 2019 Jens-Peter Engelund appeals from the order that denied his petition filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”). We affirm. The PCRA court summarized the history of this case as follows. [Appellant] is a citizen of Denmark who was residing in the United States as a lawful permanent resident at the time of the charges at issue in this case. [Appellant] was charged with ten counts of possession of firearm prohibited pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6105(a) and one count of make repairs/sell/etc offensive weapon pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 908(a). [Appellant] was represented by Attorney Patrick Klena (“Attorney Klena”) from his preliminary hearing through entry of [Appellant]’s guilty plea and sentencing. [Appellant] pleaded guilty to one count of possession of firearm prohibited, a first degree misdemeanor, and one count of make repairs/sell/etc, offensive weapons, a first degree misdemeanor, on March 16, 2018. [In the written plea colloquy, Appellant acknowledged that he understood that pleading guilty might affect his immigration status and “might result in deportation.”] Th[e trial c]ourt sentenced [Appellant] to incarceration at the Centre County Correctional Facility for a period of not less than 108 days nor more than 12 months, with J-S54014-19 12 months of concurrent probation. [Appellant] did not file a direct appeal of his sentence but later filed a motion for appointment of counsel for PCRA relief on July 25, 2018. [Appellant] was assigned PCRA counsel on August 15, 2018. [Appellant] is currently detained on immigration charges at the Pike County Correctional Facility. [Appellant] alleges that he is eligible for relief because he was significantly prejudiced by ineffective assistance of counsel in that Attorney Klena failed to inform [Appellant] of the immigration consequences of his guilty plea and conviction. At the PCRA hearing, Attorney Klena testified that he reviewed each question on the written guilty plea colloquy with [Appellant] but that Attorney Klena initialed each page of the colloquy in the space for [Appellant]’s initials. Additionally, while Attorney Klena could not recall the specific details of this plea, he testified that he advises all clients with immigration issues to seek an immigration attorney early in the representation. PCRA Court Opinion, 2/28/19, at 1-2 (unnecessary capitalization omitted); Written Guilty Plea Colloquy, 3/23/18, at 4. The PCRA court denied Appellant’s petition, and Appellant filed a timely appeal.1 Appellant states one question for this Court’s consideration: ____________________________________________ 1 The PCRA court ordered Appellant to file a statement of errors complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b), but Appellant did not timely comply. Appellant subsequently filed a Rule 1925(b) statement nunc pro tunc, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals