Petition for writ of certiorari in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Donald Sprowal v. Edward J. Hendrick.
Edwin D. Wolf, for petitioner.
James D. Crawford, Deputy District Attorney, and Arlen Specter, District Attorney, for Commonwealth.
Bell, C. J., Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts and Pomeroy, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice Roberts.
Donald Sprowal and four other youths were arrested on March 21, 1970, and charged with assault with intent to kill and lesser related crimes. Two of the five were over eighteen years of age and, therefore, charged as adults. These two received preliminary hearings and were released on $500 bail. The two other juveniles and Donald were ordered held in custody by a juvenile probation officer pending their intake interview. All three were interviewed on March 23, and identical delinquency petitions were filed against them. The next day the three appeared in juvenile court for
a detention hearing, at which time the judge ordered all three detained, appointed the Voluntary Defender to represent them, and scheduled a certification hearing for April 6.
At the certification hearing only Donald and one of the other juveniles were present, the third having been quarantined at the Youth Study Center. The two were told that the Commonwealth's witnesses were not available and that the case would be continued. Donald's counsel then requested a "probable cause hearing," which request was granted.
At the "probable cause hearing," held two days later, there was testimony introduced which the judge found sufficient to sustain the proceedings. At the conclusion of the hearing, the judge released the other two juveniles into the custody of their parents but ordered Donald held, stating that he did not want to countermand the determination of the judge who had ordered Donald's detention at the March 24 hearing. The following day, April 9, the judge who had ordered Donald detained on March 24 told Donald's counsel that he had no objection to Donald's release. Counsel then appeared before the judge who conducted the probable cause hearing and requested Donald's release. The request was denied, apparently because the judge had reason to believe that some other juveniles, including Donald's released co-defendant, had been in the vicinity of the courthouse the day before and had threatened retaliation for the court's failure to release Donald. This reason, however, does not appear of record, but was presented to the Court at oral argument.
An appeal from the refusal to release and a petition for habeas corpus were then filed in the Superior Court, which dismissed the appeal as interlocutory and denied the habeas corpus petition on its merits. On the day of the denial an original petition for habeas corpus was filed in this Court. We have taken jurisdiction in order
to clarify the procedures which govern the preadjudicatory release of juvenile defendants. Commonwealth ex rel. Paylor v. Claudy, 366 Pa. 282, 77 A.2d 350 (1951). The case is remanded to the Court of Common Pleas, Family Court Division, for a hearing and ...