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 v. CUFF (11/16/61)

November 16, 1961

COMMONWEALTH
v.
CUFF, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 314, Oct. T., 1961, from order of Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace of Philadelphia County, Feb. T., 1941, No. 213, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Joseph John Cuff. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Joseph John Cuff, appellant, in propria persona.

Arlen Specter, Assistant District Attorney, Paul M. Chalfin, First Assistant District Attorney, and James C. Crumlish, Jr., District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.

Author: Rhodes

[ 196 Pa. Super. Page 275]

OPINION BY RHODES, P.J.

On February 13, 1941, appellant was found guilty at a trial before a judge and a jury in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia County on an indictment charging robbery, and was sentenced by Judge LEVINTHAL to a term of not less than the years nor more than twenty years in the Eastern State Penitentiary. On March 6, 1961, he filed a petition to vacate judgment of sentence in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia County, being presently incarcerated

[ 196 Pa. Super. Page 276]

    in the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia, This petition, which the court below apparently treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, was denied on May 22, 1961, by Judge KELLEY.

In his appeal to this Court, three questions are raised by appellant.

1. Appellant claims his arrest was brought about by illegally seized evidence in that a friend of the police forcibly broke into an automobile parked outside appellant's residence, and wrongfully took from it a selective service card bearing appellant's name. Appellant does not assert that such alleged illegally seized evidence was the basis of his conviction on this particular charge of robbery, but only that such evidence resulted in his arrest. The regularity of the proceedings and all other matters preliminary to the finding of an indictment cannot be raised on habeas corpus. Com. ex rel. Lockhart v. Myers, 193 Pa. Superior Ct. 531, 537, 165 A.2d 400. See Com. ex rel. Romano v. Banmiller, 397 Pa. 606, 156 A.2d 825. The recent case of Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081, dealing with the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence in state courts, cited by appellant, has no application here.

2. In his petition appellant stated that, as a result of confinement and mistreatment by the police, he was forced to confess and pleaded guilty to a series of indictments charging armed robbery. However, he does not allege that any confession was involved in his trial on the indictment at No. 213, February Term, 1941, to which he pleaded not guilty and was tried by a jury. The petition therefore does not allege a conviction based on an involuntary confession, nor does it set forth any lack of due process on this ground. Cf. Com. ex rel. Norman v. Banmiller, 395 Pa. 232, 236, 149 A.2d 881. A petition ...


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.