The Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed the Court of Common Pleas order that granted the defendant’s second PCRA petition. The defendant tried to sidestep the PCRA’s time bar with a newly-discovered evidence argument. He claimed that his initial PCRA counsel failed to assert non-frivolous claims or, in the alternative, argued only frivolous claims. The Court disagreed, holding that the attorney’s representation did not constitute ineffectiveness per se, as he did not wholly deprive the defendant of collateral review. And a general ineffectiveness claim cannot work around the time bar. Thus, the instant petition was untimely.