Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. MARSHALL v. MARONEY. (06/13/62)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


June 13, 1962

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. MARSHALL, APPELLANT,
v.
MARONEY.

Appeal, No. 138, April T., 1962, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, April T., 1962, No. 344, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Ernest Marshall v. James F. Maroney, Superintendent. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Ernest Marshall, appellant, in propria persona.

William Claney Smith, Assistant District Attorney, and Edward C. Boyle, District Attorney, for appellee.

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

Author: Rhodes

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 86]

OPINION BY RHODES, P.J.

Relator was indicted in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Allegheny County, No. 181, September Sessions, 1959, on a charge of possession of, and dealing in, narcotics. Being represented by counsel, relator entered a plea of guilty to the indictment and was sentenced on November 2, 1959, to a term of not less than two and one-half years nor more than five years in the Western State Penitentiary.*fn1 His petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in the court below was dismissed, without hearing, on January 10, 1962, by Judge VAN DER VOORT. Relator has appealed.

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 87]

On appeal relator objects to an alleged illegal search and seizure of narcotics found in his possession. Since a plea of guilty had been entered, evidence normally used to obtain a conviction is not in issue, nor can such matter, under these circumstances, be raised by habeas corpus. Com. ex rel. Bollinger v. Myers, 185 Pa. Superior Ct. 160, 162, 137 A.2d 843; Com. ex rel. Sickler v. Myers, 188 Pa. Superior Ct. 541, 543, 149 A.2d 178; Com. ex rel. Peiffer v. Banmiller, 193 Pa. Superior Ct. 480, 166 A.2d 324. The guilty plea obviated the necessity of a trial; hence, no question of a trial or conviction based on illegal evidence obtained through a possibly unreasonable search and seizure arises or is involved. The statement of the Supreme Court of the United States, in an analogous situation, in Townsend v. Burke, 334 U.S. 736, 738, 68 S.Ct. 1252, 92 L.Ed. 1690, 1692, applies equally here: "In this present case no confession was used because the plea of guilty in open court dispensed with proof of the crime." See Com. ex rel. Roberts v. Keenan, 170 Pa. Superior Ct. 282, 289, 85 A.2d 678. Cf. Com. ex rel. Miller v. Myers, 187 Pa. Superior Ct. 565, 567, 146 A.2d 145.

Disposition

The order is affirmed.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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