Commonwealth v. Sprangle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Sprangle

275 A.2d 114, 442 Pa. 271, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 1008

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 18, 1971

DocketAppeal, 114

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 275 A.2d 114 (Commonwealth v. Sprangle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme 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 v. Sprangle, 275 A.2d 114, 442 Pa. 271, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 1008 (Pa. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Me. Justice Pomeroy,

On September 10, 1964, appellant was convicted by a jury of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to five to twelve years imprisonment. No appeal was taken. Subsequently appellant, acting as his own counsel, filed a habeas corpus petition which was dismissed without a hearing. . The order of dismissal was affirmed by this Court. Commonwealth ex rel. Sprangle v. Maroney, 423 Pa. 589, 225 A. 2d 236 (1967).

In 1968 the appellant filed a petition under the Post Conviction Hearing Act, Act of January 25, 1966, P. L. (1965) 1580, 19 P.S. §1180-1 et seq., alleging several grounds for relief. Following an evidentiary hearing at which appellant was represented by counsel, the petition was dismissed. This appeal followed.

Appellant asserts that he has suffered three constitutional deprivations, to wit: (1) that there was introduced into evidence at trial a statement given under circumstances violating the rule of Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977 (1964) ; (2) that his trial counsel had been ineffective; and (3) that he had been denied his right to appeal.

We consider only the last issue because we are constrained to disagree with the finding of the hearing judge that appellant had not been denied his right to counsel on appeal. The trial record being silent on this point, the burden in the post-conviction proceeding was upon the Commonwealth to establish that the appellant knew both of his right to appeal and of his right, if indigent, to be represented by counsel free of charge to him. Commonwealth v. Freeman, 438 Pa. 1, 5, 263 A. 2d 403. (1970), Commonwealth v. Ezell, 431 Pa. 101, *273 103, 244 A. 2d 646 (1968), Commonwealth v. Wilson, 430 Pa. 1, 3, 241 A. 2d 760 (1968). Appellant’s court-appointed trial counsel testified at the PCBLA hearing that both he and the trial judge had informed appellant of his right to appeal. Counsel also testified, however, that he had told appellant that he personally would not prosecute an appeal on appellant’s behalf. There is no testimony of record to prove that appellant was ever informed of his right, if indigent, to free counsel on appeal. On this record the Commonwealth has not carried its burden of proof; therefore appellant is entitled, with the assistance of free counsel, to file post-trial motions as though timely filed.

Accordingly, the order of the lower court is vacated and the record remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the decision of this case.

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

Opinion by

Me. Justice Pomeroy,

On September 10, 1964, appellant was convicted by a jury of voluntary manslaughter and sentenced to five to twelve years imprisonment. No appeal was taken. Subsequently appellant, acting as his own counsel, filed a habeas corpus petition which was dismissed without a hearing. . The order of dismissal was affirmed by this Court. Commonwealth ex rel. Sprangle v. Maroney, 423 Pa. 589, 225 A. 2d 236 (1967).

In 1968 the appellant filed a petition under the Post Conviction Hearing Act, Act of January 25, 1966, P. L. (1965) 1580, 19 P.S. §1180-1 et seq., alleging several grounds for relief. Following an evidentiary hearing at which appellant was represented by counsel, the petition was dismissed. This appeal followed.

Appellant asserts that he has suffered three constitutional deprivations, to wit: (1) that there was introduced into evidence at trial a statement given under circumstances violating the rule of Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 12 L. Ed. 2d 977 (1964) ; (2) that his trial counsel had been ineffective; and (3) that he had been denied his right to appeal.

We consider only the last issue because we are constrained to disagree with the finding of the hearing judge that appellant had not been denied his right to counsel on appeal. The trial record being silent on this point, the burden in the post-conviction proceeding was upon the Commonwealth to establish that the appellant knew both of his right to appeal and of his right, if indigent, to be represented by counsel free of charge to him. Commonwealth v. Freeman, 438 Pa. 1, 5, 263 A. 2d 403. (1970), Commonwealth v. Ezell, 431 Pa. 101, *273 103, 244 A. 2d 646 (1968), Commonwealth v. Wilson, 430 Pa. 1, 3, 241 A. 2d 760 (1968). Appellant’s court-appointed trial counsel testified at the PCBLA hearing that both he and the trial judge had informed appellant of his right to appeal. Counsel also testified, however, that he had told appellant that he personally would not prosecute an appeal on appellant’s behalf. There is no testimony of record to prove that appellant was ever informed of his right, if indigent, to free counsel on appeal. On this record the Commonwealth has not carried its burden of proof; therefore appellant is entitled, with the assistance of free counsel, to file post-trial motions as though timely filed.

Accordingly, the order of the lower court is vacated and the record remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.2d 114, 442 Pa. 271, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 1008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-sprangle-pa-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack