Commonwealth v. Justin Mitchell
Whether a pro se petitioner may raise PCRA counsel's ineffectiveness for the first time on appeal when he could have raised it in a response to the Rule 907 notice but did not.
Summary by John A. Julian, Esq. Updated October 1, 2026.
- CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
- Docket1127 EDA 2025
- Citation2026 Pa. Super. 52
- DecidedMarch 19, 2026
- DispositionAffirmed
- OpinionRead the opinion | Court PDF
What the court held
The claim was waived. Following Commonwealth v. Davey, the court explained that Bradley relaxes preservation rules only where the procedural posture made it impossible to raise the claim in the PCRA court. Counsel had already been permitted to withdraw when the Rule 907 notice issued, so Mitchell could have raised the claim in a Rule 907 response but filed none.
Why it matters. After a Turner/Finley withdrawal, the twenty-day Rule 907 response window is the petitioner's first and often only chance to preserve a challenge to PCRA counsel's performance. Filing no response forfeits the claim on appeal.
Does this decision affect a case you know? The window to act on a new decision can be as short as one year from the date it was announced. Request a case review or call (215) 568-0607.
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the opinion before relying on it.