Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. MICHAEL CASERTA (01/14/55)

January 14, 1955

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
MICHAEL CASERTA, APPELLANT



Appeals, Nos. 296 and 297, Oct. T., 1954, from judgment of Court of Quarter Sessions of Delaware County, Nov. T., 1953, Nos. 236 and 237 in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Michael Caserta. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

Sidney Ginsberg, Philadelphia, for appellant.

J. Harold Hughes, Assistant District Attorney, with him Raymond R. Start, District Attorney and Joseph E. Pappano, First Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P. J., Hirt, Ross, Gunther, Wright, Woodside and Ervin, JJ.

Author: Woodside

[ 177 Pa. Super. Page 463]

OPINION BY WOODSIDE, J.,

This is an appeal from the judgments of sentences of the court of quarter sessions of Delaware County wherein the defendant was found guilty by a jury of conspiracy and setting up an illegal lottery.

An information was filed before a Justice of the Peace in Media, Delaware County and a warrant issued thereon. The defendant was arrested in Philadelphia by a State policeman who had the warrant. The defendant requested the arresting officer to take him before any magistrate in Philadelphia for a preliminary hearing. The officer, however, took him directly to the Justice of the Peace in Delaware County who had issued the warrant. The defendant asked for a continuance of the hearing to the following day so that he could obtain a stenographer to take notes of testimony. This was granted. A hearing was held the following day when testimony was taken to determine whether the defendant should be held for court. At the hearing the defendant asked to be discharged because he had not been taken before a Philadelphia magistrate. This request was refused; and the defendant was held for court. He thereupon posted bail for court.

[ 177 Pa. Super. Page 464]

After the Delaware County Grand Jury indicted the defendant he moved to quash the indictments on the ground that they were void because the Justice of the Peace in Delaware County had no jurisdiction to hear the case. After argument before the court en banc the motion was dismissed on opinion by Judge SWENEY.

The appellant contends that the court erred in dismissing this motion. He bases his argument on his interpretation of section 3 of the Act of March 31, 1860, P. L. 427, as amended, 19 PS § 3 which authorizes an officer to whom a warrant is issued to arrest in any county of the Commonwealth the person against whom it is issued.

The section is verbose, and we shall not quote it verbatim because we think it can be stated more understandably, without doing any violence to its meaning, as follows:

In case any person against whom a warrant may be issued shall be in any county out of the jurisdiction of the magistrate, "it shall and may be lawful" for the person having such warrant to arrest such offender out of the jurisdiction of the magistrate, and to carry him before any magistrate in the county in which he is apprehended, and in case the offense is bailable by a magistrate, and such offender shall be willing and ready to give bail for his appearance at the next court of quarter sessions to be held where the offense was committed, such magistrate in the county where the offender was apprehended "shall and may take such bail for his appearance in the same manner" as the magistrate of the proper county might have done; and in case the offense shall not be bailable by a magistrate, or such offender shall not give bail for his appearance at the proper court, then the person apprehending such offender shall carry and convey him before one of the magistrates of the proper county

[ 177 Pa. Super. Page 465]

    where such offense was committed, there to be dealt ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.