Altoona man’s latest court petition dismissed

Bellon has tried to lower drug-related sentence multiple times

The Pennsylvania Superior Court last week dealt former Altoona resident Charles A. Bellon a setback in his efforts to seek a reduction in his 31- to 46-year prison sentence on drug-related charges.

In his petitions, which the court ruled untimely, Bellon sought a resentencing hearing, asked that an attorney be appointed to represent him, and sought the recusal of Deputy Attorney General Christopher J. Schmidt, who has been prosecuting him throughout the years.

Bellon challenged what he contended was a "new sentence" in 2020 and therefore the petitions he filed in 2021 were timely, but Blair County Senior Judge Timothy M. Sullivan ruled last year that the alleged new sentence was not new but a correction to his initial sentence that was imposed in 2009.

A person sentenced on a criminal charge has a one-year window to appeal that sentence, and the appeal date for Bellon's initial sentence expired in 2011.

The judge concluded that Bellon's 2021 court filings were untimely.

Bellon disagreed and filed an appeal with the Superior Court.

A panel of three judges, Mary Jane Bowes, Judith F. Olson and Megan King, pointed out that Bellon did not claim a legal exception to the one-year time limit and therefore his latest filings were "properly dismissed."

Bellon sought time to amend his Blair County petitions, but the judge denied that request.

The appeals court panel said it had no basis to conclude that Sullivan committed reversible error in denying his request to amend.

Bellon, 44, has been in prison for the most of the last 20 years, since his arrest as the alleged leader of a drug organization that operated in Blair and surrounding counties.

He is incarcerated in the State Correctional Institution at Somerset.

Bellon in 2003 entered guilty pleas to the drug-related charges but then withdrew those pleas.

At the time, his request to withdraw was denied, but the Superior Court interceded on his behalf.

Bellon's case then went to trial and he was convicted by a jury of multiple offenses, including 10 counts of possession with intent to deliver.

In 2009, Blair County Judge Hiram A. Carpenter, who has now retired, sentenced Bellon to a prison term of 31 to 62 years.

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Alleyne v. United States that any increase in a sentence by imposing a mandatory term behind bars must be determined by the jury, not a judge.

Bellon claimed on appeal that 10 of his sentences on charges of possession with intent to deliver violated Alleyne.

He received a sentence of seven to 14 years on each drug charge.

He challenged the legality of his drug sentences, contending the seven-year minimums and 14-year maximums were illegal under Alleyne.

His argument finally landed for review in the U.S. District Court in Johnstown.

The Pennsylvania and federal courts determined that Alleyne did not apply retroactively -- meaning that Bellon's sentences on the possession with intent to deliver charges stood.

But, in the federal review, U.S. Magistrate Judge Keith Pesto determined that the 14-year maximums were beyond what state law allowed. The maximum under state law on a charge of possession with intent to deliver was 10 years.

Pesto's ruling was approved by District Judge Kim R. GIbson, and Blair County was given 120 days to resentence Bellon to conform to state law.

On Jan. 14, 2020, Carpenter reduced Bellon's maximum term behind bars to 46 years but retained the seven-year minimums, which meant Bellon's new sentence was 31 to 46 years.

Bellon's new line of appeal was that the federal court had ordered his initial sentence of 31 to 62 years vacated and that his new sentence of 31 to 46 years imposed in 2020 was reviewable under Alleyne.

He also argued that his new sentence was illegal because he was not granted a proper sentencing hearing in which he could argue for an overall reduced sentence.

The appeals courts, however, rejected Bellon's argument and found that his revised sentence was simply a correction of a mistake and did not require a full sentencing hearing.

The Superior Court emphasized in last week's opinion that Bellon was not entitled to a new sentencing hearing because "no new sentence was imposed."

"Rather," the panel stated, "the 2009 sentence ... became final in 2011 and remained final when the sentence was conformed to the federal court's mandate in 2020."

That meant Bellon's recent petitions were untimely, the Superior Court panel concluded.

Bellon still has the option of seeking a review of last week's ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Bellon is representing himself in the appeal process.