Appeal from order of Court of Oyer and Terminer of Huntingdon County, Sept. T., 1954, No. 21, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Alfred Nardi, Jr.
Joseph W. Mullin, for appellant.
John P. Fernsler and Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Deputy Attorneys General, and William C. Sennett, Attorney General, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Bell, C. J., Musmanno, Jones, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts, JJ. Mr. Justice Roberts concurs in the result. Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
The petitioner in this case, convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to life imprisonment, filed a petition under the Post Conviction Hearing Act alleging that counsel should have been appointed for him prior to the time of his preliminary hearing, that the trial court should have appointed a psychiatrist to assist counsel in preparing for trial, and/or a sanity commission should have been ordered to determine the competency of the petitioner to stand trial as well as his competency at the time of the commission of the alleged offense; that defense counsel should have been permitted to see, prior to trial, the petitioner's confessions, which had been reduced to writing; and that his confessions were not voluntary.
A hearing was held in the court below where both the Commonwealth and the petitioner presented evidence. On August 18, 1967, the court dismissed the petition and this appeal followed.
As to petitioner being entitled to appointed counsel prior to the preliminary hearing the answer is that the law and criminal procedure in effect in 1954 [date of the preliminary hearing] did not require such appointment except where unusual circumstances transformed the preliminary hearing into a critical stage. (Commonwealth ex rel. Fox v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 308) Nothing in the record indicates any such "unusual circumstances."
It is argued in behalf of the petitioner that he was a defective delinquent and that therefore a preliminary hearing was mandatory. It is not indicated in the record that the petitioner's mental condition was such that the preliminary hearing had to be regarded "a critical stage." The petitioner was not a juvenile, he was 22 years of age when he stabbed and killed a guard at the Pennsylvania Institution for Defective Delinquents
at Huntingdon, prior to a planned escape from that institution where he was then an inmate. Nor does the record suggest that the petitioner was prejudiced in his legal rights as the result of his not having counsel at the preliminary hearing.
Four days subsequent to the hearing, counsel was appointed and, under the law as it existed in 1954, this was a "timely appointment."
When defense counsel sought the appointment of a psychiatrist to assist in the preparation of the defense, the trial court held it had no authority to appoint a psychiatrist at the expense of the county, the court, in this respect, relying on Commonwealth v. Green, 346 Pa. 172. This refusal, however, was not crucial to the petitioner's case since the court advised counsel that if in his opinion the petitioner was unable to stand trial, the court would enter an order for the appointment of a sanity commission upon presentation of an appropriate petition. The lower court states in his opinion that "counsel indicated that in ...