Commonwealth v. Whalen
This text of 23 Pa. D. & C.2d 402 (Commonwealth v. Whalen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant has filed an appeal from the dismissal of his petition to join in the petition of his codefendant Perpiglia for relief from a judgment and sentence. The petition was considered as a petition for a writ of error coram [403]*403nobis in that it alleged the existence of after-discovered evidence. The evidence was the alleged confession by another of the perpetration of the crime for which defendant was sentenced.
The writ of error coram nobis does not lie to permit the review of a judgment for after-discovered evidence: Commonwealth v. Harris, 351 Pa. 325; Commonwealth ex rel. Riccio v. Dilworth, 179 Pa. Superior Ct. 64.
The petition was accordingly dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
23 Pa. D. & C.2d 402, 1960 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-whalen-pactcomplphilad-1960.