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. HEISS v. RUCH. (01/06/56)

January 6, 1956

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. HEISS, APPELLANT,
v.
RUCH.



Appeal, No. 322, Jan. T., 1955, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 1 of Philadelphia County, June T., 1955, No. 797, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Robert Heiss v. Major William J. Ruch, Warden, Philadelphia County Prison. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Charles F. G. Smith, for appellant.

Francis A. Biunno, Assistant District Attorney, with him Victor Wright, Assistant District Attorney, Vincent Panati, Assistant District Attorney and Samuel Dash, District Attorney, for appellee.

Before Stearne, Jones, Bell, Musmanno and Arnold, JJ.

Author: Jones

[ 384 Pa. Page 37]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE JONES

The appellant is confined in the Philadelphia County Prison under an extradition warrant issued by the Governor of Pennsylvania on the requisition of the Governor of New Jersey. He stands charged in the

[ 384 Pa. Page 38]

    latter State by indictment for a robbery alleged to have been committed by him in the City of Trenton. He petitioned the court below for a writ of habeas corpus, contending (1) that he was not sufficiently identified as the perpetrator of the specified robbery and (2) that the requisition for his extradition from Pennsylvania failed to aver that he was in the demanding State when the alleged crime was committed. The court below denied the petition, and the petitioner brought his appeal to this court as authorized by Section 7 of the Act of May 25, 1951, P.L. 415, 12 PS § 1907.

The action of the learned court below is fully justified by the record.

On the question of identification, the hearing judge took the testimony of the victim of the robbery, who identified the petitioner as the culprit, and of another witness who testified to having seen the petitioner in Trenton the day of the robbery. The evidence was therefore sufficient to establish that the petitioner was the person sought by the requisition for extradition.

The appellant's contention that the requisition does not contain an averment that he was within the demanding State when the alleged crime was committed (see Uniform Criminal Extradition Act of July 8, 1941, P.L. 288, 19 PS § 191.1 et seq.) is answered adversely to him by our recent ruling in Commonwealth ex rel. Taylor v. Superintendent, Philadelphia County Prison, 382 Pa. 181, 184-185, 114 A.2d 343. In that case the requisition alleged that the relator stood charged with breaking and entering in the County of Arlington, Virginia, and that he fled from "the justice" of that State. Speaking for this court, Mr. Justice ARNOLD said (p. 185), - "The copy of the indictment found, ...


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.