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 EX REL. TAYLOR v. SUPERINTENDENT (05/25/55)

May 25, 1955

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. TAYLOR
v.
SUPERINTENDENT, PHILADELPHIA COUNTY PRISON, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 92, Jan. T., 1955, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 7 of Philadelphia County, June T., 1954, No. 4822, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Charles A. Taylor v. Superintendent, Philadelphia County Prison. Order reversed.

COUNSEL

Victor Wright, Assistant District Attorney, with him Armand Della Porta, Assistant District Attorney, Samuel Dash, First Assistant District Attorney, and Richardson Dilworth, District Attorney, for appellant.

Edwin Seave, with him Seave & Good, for appellee.

Before Stern, C.j., Stearne, Jones, Bell, Chidsey, Musmanno, and Arnold, JJ.

Author: Arnold

[ 382 Pa. Page 182]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE ARNOLD

Commonwealth appeals from the order of the court below discharging relator after hearing on his petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Relator was arrested under authority of a warrant issued by the Governor of Pennsylvania upon the requisition of the Governor of Virginia.

After proof of identification of relator, the Commonwealth introduced in evidence the authorization of an agent to return relator to Virginia, a duplicate and a photostatic copy of the requisition of the Governor of Virginia, together with a certificate of the Deputy Secretary of Pennsylvania that the duplicate and photostat were true and complete copies of the requisition and supporting papers received from the Governor of Virginia, and on file in the Department of State. The seal of the State of Virginia not being on the duplicate and not sufficiently clear on the photostat,

[ 382 Pa. Page 183]

    the Commonwealth produced the certificate of the Secretary of the Commonwealth certifying that the original requisition bore the seal and describing it in detail.

The reason for non-production of the original requisition was that the executive department of the state refused to release it, the policy being to supply only copies thereof.

Relator offered no evidence but moved for his discharge on the grounds that (1) he was not properly charged with a crime in the demanding state; (2) it was not proved he was in the demanding state at the time of the alleged crime; (3) he was not properly charged with being a fugitive; and (4) there being no seal of the ...


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.