Commonwealth ex rel. Butler v. Claudy

91 A.2d 318, 171 Pa. Super. 573, 1952 Pa. Super. LEXIS 437
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 1, 1952
DocketAppeal, No. 13
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 91 A.2d 318 (Commonwealth ex rel. Butler v. Claudy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth ex rel. Butler v. Claudy, 91 A.2d 318, 171 Pa. Super. 573, 1952 Pa. Super. LEXIS 437 (Pa. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinion

Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.,

Relator, having been convicted of burglary, larceny and receiving stolen goods, was sentenced by the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Westmoreland County to serve a term of not less than eight years nor more than twenty years in the Western State Penitentiary.

On March 16, 1948, relator was arrested, and on March 20, 1948, he was given a preliminary hearing before an alderman. He and an accomplice, Cambridge McMorris, were charged with burglary, larceny; and receiving stolen goods. They were indicted, tried together, and convicted as indicted by a jury on May 27, 1948. Each was represented by his own counsel. Sentence was imposed on June 14, 1948.

[575]*575Relator filed his present petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County on July 28, 1951. Rule to show cause was issued and answers were filed by the Warden of the Western State Penitentiary and the District Attorney of Westmoreland County- The petition contains numerous and repetitious averments. Among them is an allegation that relator was denied the right to be personally present during all stages of his trial. This was denied in the answer of the District Attorney, wherein it was said: “The petitioner and his counsel were present in open court when the jury was selected; during the trial; when the verdict of guilty was returned; and at time of sentence.” If we could find merit in any of the other charges made in his petition, it would be sufficient to say that they are not reviewable in a habeas corpus proceeding after trial and conviction.

In dismissing relator’s petition and refusing a writ of habeas corpus, the President Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County said: “The relator herein and Cambridge L. McMorris were tried together for burglary and when called for arraignment and trial relator was present and represented by able and experienced counsel, who made no request for a severance. A plea of not guilty being entered, a jury was called, purged, selected and sworn in the presence of the relator with his counsel and accomplice, Cambridge McMorris. The relator received a fair and impartial trial and the jury, which heard his case, returned a verdict of guilty in his presence. No request was made to poll the jury and no petition was filed for a new trial.” It was also stated by President Judge Laird that the matter was res judicata as relator had presented a similar petition to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County at No. 2093, July Term, [576]*5761950A, which was dismissed on June 12, 1950, by the late President Judge Frank P. Patterson.1

The proceedings in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County are not a part of the record in the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, except that reference is made thereto in relator’s present petition. It is recognized that the trial record may relevantly be considered in habeas corpus proceedings. Com. ex rel. Chambers v. Claudy, 171 Pa. Superior Ct. 115, 90 A. 2d 383. But that rule is not applicable to the records of another court of common pleas which have not been made a part of the present record. As to prior habeas corpus proceedings, see Com. ex rel. Allen v. Claudy, 170 Pa. Superior Ct. 499, 87 A. 2d 74; Com. ex rel. Banks v. Claudy, 370 Pa. 190, 88 A. 2d 53.

In Com. ex rel. Milewski v. Ashe, 363 Pa. 596, 601, 70 A. 2d 625, 627, our Supreme Court said: “It is fundamental in Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence that the defendant charged with a felony shall be permitted to be present at every stage of the trial. Certainly the rendition of the verdict is one of the most important stages of the trial.”

In view of the unequivocal statement of President Judge Laird, who presided at the trial of relator and Cambridge McMorris, as well as at the hearing on the petition of McMorris2 for a similar writ, we reluctantly [577]*577reverse the court’s order dismissing relator’s petition. It does not affirmatively appear from the trial record that relator was present at the rendition of the verdict; he was not at liberty on bail. But as the trial involved a non-capital felony, the proceeding is presumed regular and lawful until the contrary appears. Holmes v. The Commonwealth, 25 Pa. 221, 224. The petition and answer create a factual issue which we deem necessary to have resolved upon a hearing and by findings of fact based upon the evidence or the trial record.3 If there is an appeal from the order made, the record would then permit a proper review.

The order of the court below is reversed, and the record is remitted to the court below for hearing and determination.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Commonwealth v. McLaurin
437 A.2d 440 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1981)
Commonwealth ex rel. Lockhart v. Myers
193 Pa. Super. 531 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1960)
Com. Ex Rel. Lockhart v. Myers
165 A.2d 400 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1960)
United States ex rel. Hamilton v. Maroney
184 F. Supp. 721 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1960)
United States ex rel. De Simone v. Commonwealth
141 F. Supp. 699 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1956)
Commonwealth ex rel. Hancock v. Maroney
110 A.2d 923 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1955)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. La Tempa v. Burke
105 A.2d 134 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1954)
Commonwealth ex rel. Wagner v. Tees
101 A.2d 770 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1953)
Commonwealth Ex Rel. Paylor v. Claudy
98 A.2d 468 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1953)
Commonwealth ex rel. Dote v. Burke
96 A.2d 151 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1953)
Commonwealth ex rel. McMorris v. Claudy
94 A.2d 108 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 A.2d 318, 171 Pa. Super. 573, 1952 Pa. Super. LEXIS 437, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-ex-rel-butler-v-claudy-pasuperct-1952.