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.

PRICE v. RUNDLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA


March 5, 1968

Johnny PRICE
v.
Alfred T. RUNDLE, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania, and Joseph R. Brierley, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Troutman, District Judge.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: TROUTMAN

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TROUTMAN, District Judge.

 This matter is before the Court for disposition of plaintiff's petition for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

 The District Attorney's office of Bucks County has informed us that on March 17, 1967, the petitioner was sentenced to five-ten years on Bill of Indictment No. 51, March Term, 1964, in the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Bucks County and to one year on Bill of Indictment No. 52, March Term 1964, in the Quarter Sessions Court of Bucks County. The sentences were to run concurrently and were to commence as of January 19, 1965.

 Petitioner had been incarcerated at the Graterford Correctional Institution but is presently incarcerated at the State Correctional Institution in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Petitioner contends that the named defendants have intentionally and deliberately refused to furnish him with copies of the notes of testimony of his criminal trials and have thereby deprived him of his civil rights within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.

 It may well be, as petitioner contends, that the named defendants were in possession of copies of the notes of testimony of his criminal trials (61 P.S. § 302) and that they refused to make them available to him. However, 17 P.S. § 1802 provides that once the appeal time has expired, it is within the discretion of the State Courts to determine whether State prisoners are entitled to copies of the notes of testimony of their criminal trials. *fn1" Indeed, petitioner admits that it was suggested that he "write to the Clerk of Courts", but he apparently has not done so. It follows that the named defendants were under no duty to make their copies of the notes of testimony available to the petitioner and their refusal to do so did not thereby deprive the petitioner of his civil rights within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985. Consequently, the plaintiff's petition must be denied in that his complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted.


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.