The Pennsylvania Superior Court has dismissed a post-conviction petition filed by an inmate who is serving a 10-year minimum sentence for striking a corrections officer while in the former State Correctional Institution at Cresson.

The inmate, Robert Fennell, was sentenced by Cambria County Judge Timothy P. Creany after being convicted in a non-jury trial of aggravated assault, recklessly endangering another person, resisting arrest, simple assault and assault by a prisoner.

At the time of the Cresson incident in January 2009, Fennell was serving time on an assault charge from Philadelphia County.

Creany imposed a 10-20 year sentence on Fennel, but Fennell appealed and the Superior Court vacated his convictions for aggravated assault and simple assault.

It let stand the convictions for assault by a prisoner, resisting arrest and recklessly endangering another person.

It also upheld his sentence, which was to run consecutive to his initial sentence from Philadelphia County.

The Cresson SCI was closed in 2013 and Fennell is now incarcerated in SCI Mahanoy.

As time went on, Fennell continued to file post-conviction petitions challenging the representation he received from two area attorneys who were appointed to represent him.

One of the attorneys allegedly filed an untimely legal brief that had been requested by the Superior Court and the second attorney asked out of the Fennell case because he claimed that untimeliness is an issue that cannot be challenged.

Fennell, acting as his own attorney, then filed an appeal in which he claimed the two attorneys were “ineffective” in their representation.

Last Friday, a Superior Court panel, in reviewing the appeal, found it too was untimely and dismissed it.

The panel included Judges Maria McLaughlin, Daniel D. McCaffery and Dan Pellegrini.

Fennell, the panel stated, should have raised his issues against the attorneys a long time ago.

A person convicted of a crime has a year from the date his case was closed to file a post-conviction petition in which he can raise other issues that would indicate he did not receive a fair trial or that his sentence was excessive.

Fennell initially challenged his conviction on the offenses that arose from his attack on the corrections officer.

The panel determined that Fennell’s case was closed on Nov. 12, 2013, after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected further hearing in his case.

The Superior Court therefore concluded Fennell’s present petition should have been filed by Nov. 12, 2014.

He did not challenge the representation by the two attorneys until October 2020, which, according to the Superior Court, was “almost six years later, making it patently untimely.”

It also noted that some exceptions have been granted due to ineffectiveness claims, but it pointed out Fennell, for instance, never contended he was “abandoned” by his lawyers.

“Accordingly, we conclude the (post-conviction) court properly found (Fennell’s) petition was untimely filed and he was not entitled to any relief.”

Fennell can still seek review of his issues with the Supreme Court.

Fennell, who was described in news reports as being 6-feet, 5-inches and weighing more than 300 pounds, was charged with assault after approaching a much smaller corrections officer and punching him in the head.

It was alleged he then placed his hands around the officer’s neck.

The Superior Court described what occurred by stating Fennell “assaulted the officer and a melee ensued.”

Fennell wrote a letter to the Mirror that year contending he hit the officer “after being repeatedly assaulted in Cresson’s torturous cell.”

He was also upset because he had been denied visits.

At the time of the assault, SCI Cresson was being investigated by the Department of Justice for civil rights violations.