J-S68039-15

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. SYLVAN RICHARD HEMINGWAY Appellant No. 56 EDA 2015

Appeal from the PCRA Order December 2, 2014 In the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-46-CR-0011768-2001

BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., DONOHUE, J., and MUNDY, J.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY MUNDY, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 17, 2015 Appellant, Sylvan Richard Hemingway, appeals pro se from the December 2, 2014 order dismissing as untimely his second petition for relief filed pursuant to the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA), 42 Pa.C.S.A.

§§ 9541-9546. After careful review, we affirm.

On appeal, Appellant argues his sentence is illegal in light of Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013).1 Appellant’s Brief at 10. Upon careful examination, we conclude that the PCRA court has authored a 14- page opinion that thoroughly and comprehensively addresses Appellant’s ____________________________________________

We note, Appellant does not argue this claim satisfies the new constitutional right exception to the time-bar under Section 9545(b)(1)(iii), nevertheless, as the PCRA court points out in its opinion, this Court has held it does not. Commonwealth v. Miller, 102 A.3d 988, 995 (Pa. Super. 2014); PCRA Court Opinion, 2/19/15, at 10-11.

J-S68039-15

claim. Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the well-reasoned February 19, 2015 opinion of the Honorable William T. Nicholas. We therefore adopt the PCRA court’s opinion as our own and incorporate it in this judgment order.

In the event of further proceedings, the parties shall attach a copy of the February 19, 2015 PCRA court opinion to any filings.

Based on the foregoing, we conclude the PCRA court correctly dismissed Appellant’s PCRA petition as untimely. Accordingly, the PCRA court’s December 2, 2015 order is affirmed.

Order affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 11/17/2015

-2-