The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the lower court’s order dismissing the defendant’s second PCRA petition. The case’s procedural history is convoluted. In short, the lower court and the Superior Court erroneously allowed the defendant to litigate the entirety of his first PCRA petition pro se. The Superior Court held that in accordance with “our Supreme Court’s precedent and in view of the defendant’s prior uncounseled and erroneously-dismissed PCRA petition, the defendant’s current PCRA petition must be considered a timely, first petition.”