[J-36-2019] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT SAYLOR, C.J., BAER, TODD, DONOHUE, DOUGHERTY, WECHT, MUNDY, JJ. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 767 CAP : Appellee : Appeal from the Order dated May 23, : 2018 in the Court of Common Pleas, : York County, Criminal Division at No. v. : CP-67-CR-0001762-1991. : : SUBMITTED: March 11, 2019 PAUL GAMBOA TAYLOR, : : Appellant : OPINION IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL JUSTICE WECHT DECIDED: November 6, 2019 On December 8, 2014, Paul Gamboa Taylor filed his fourth petition pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”)1 seeking a new appeal to this Court from the denial of his third PCRA petition. The PCRA court dismissed the fourth petition, holding that the court lacked the authority to grant the relief that Taylor sought. The PCRA court did, in fact, have the authority to grant the requested relief, if warranted on the merits of Taylor’s claim. Accordingly, we would reverse the order of the PCRA court and would remand for further proceedings. On May 20, 1991, Taylor was arrested and charged with five counts of first-degree murder. On December 19, 1991, Taylor pleaded guilty to five counts of homicide generally. Following a degree-of-guilt hearing on January 10, 1992, the trial court found Taylor guilty of first-degree murder on all five counts. That same day, the trial court 1 See 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9541-46. proceeded to a sentencing hearing, at which the trial court sentenced Taylor to four death sentences on four counts of first-degree murder and a life without parole sentence on the fifth count. On January 23, 1992, the trial court formally imposed the sentences. This Court affirmed Taylor’s judgment of sentence on direct appeal. Commonwealth v. Taylor, 634 A.2d 1106 (Pa. 1993) (Taylor I). Taylor sought relief under the PCRA. The PCRA court denied relief, and this Court affirmed. Commonwealth v. Taylor, 718 A.2d 743 (Pa. 1998) (Taylor II). In February 1999, Taylor filed a second PCRA petition. Once again, the PCRA court denied relief, and this Court affirmed. Commonwealth v. Taylor, 753 A.2d 780 (Pa. 2000) (Taylor III). In 2008, Taylor filed a third PCRA petition, in which he alleged that trial counsel had a conflict of interest. The Commonwealth was represented by the Office of Attorney General (“OAG”). The PCRA court denied relief on jurisdictional grounds. This Court affirmed. Commonwealth v. Taylor, 67 A.3d 1245 (Pa. 2013) (Taylor IV). On December 8, 2014, Taylor filed the present PCRA petition, his fourth. Taylor asserted that news articles began to emerge in the fall of 2014 regarding former Attorney General Kathleen Kane’s discovery of inappropriate emails on OAG servers that had been exchanged between employees of the OAG and the judiciary. On October 2, 2014, news accounts revealed that pornographic email chains included former Justice Seamus McCaffery and employees of the OAG. See Karen Langley, High Court Justice Sent Emails with Explicit Content, PITTSBURGH POST GAZETTE, Oct. 2, 2014; PCRA Petition, 12/8/2014, at Ex. A. According to Taylor, beginning on ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals