Full text
Com. v. Collado, R.
J-S28019-18
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA : v. : : : RONEXON LOUIS COLLADO, : : Appellant : No. 1286 MDA 2017
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, May 24, 2017, in the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County, Criminal Division at No(s): CP-54-CR-0001821-2016.
BEFORE: OLSON, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and MUSMANNO, J. JUDGMENT ORDER BY KUNSELMAN, J.: FILED JUNE 27, 2018
Ronexo Louis Collado appeals from the judgment of sentence, after a jury convicted him of various drug-dealing charges.1 He raises two issues in his brief: that (1) venue for two of the three charges was proper only in the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County and (2) the consolidation of his three offenses into a single trial was prejudicial. Because Collado never objected to venue or consolidation before or during the trial, and only raised these issues for the first time in his post-sentence motion, both of these issues are waived. Collado claims that an objection to venue may be raised at any time, because it is a question of subject matter jurisdiction, relying upon Commonwealth v. Duden, 473 A.2d 614 (Pa. Super. 1984). However, the ____________________________________________ 1 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(30); 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 903(a)(1).
J-S28019-18
statement in Duden, upon which Collado relies, has been abrogated in Commonwealth v. Fields, 827 A.2d 1231, 1234 (Pa. Super. 2003).
As such, we hereby ORDER that the two appellate issues raised by Collado are dismissed as waived. See Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 134(A); see also Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 583, Comment.
Judgment of sentence affirmed. Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary
Date: 6/27/2018
-2-