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.

UNITED STATES EX REL. MOORE v. RUSSELL

July 7, 1971

UNITED STATES of America ex rel. Thomas J.X. MOORE
v.
Harry E. RUSSELL, Supt.


Body, District Judge.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: BODY

BODY, District Judge.

 Before the Court is the request of Thomas J.X. Moore for a writ of habeas corpus.

 On May 20, 1965, relator was found guilty after jury trial on charges of aggravated robbery (Philadelphia County, Bills of Indictment Nos. 1195-96, January Sessions 1965). He was sentenced to four to ten years imprisonment and is presently confined at the State Correctional Institution, Huntington, Pennsylvania.

 On October 28, 1966, relator filed a petition under the Pennsylvania Post-Conviction Hearing Act [PCHA], 19 Pa. Stat. Ann. ยง 1180-1 et seq. (Supp. 1971), attacking his conviction and requesting the right to appeal, nunc pro tunc. A hearing was held on relator's petition April 10, 1967, after which relator was granted leave to file post-trial motions, nunc pro tunc.

 On August 28, 1967, Judge William I. Troutman heard argument on relator's post-trial motions, which he denied in an Order and Opinion of November 22, 1967. Judge Troutman reimposed the original sentence on December 26, 1967. The Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence on appeal. Commonwealth v. Moore, 213 Pa. Super. 721, 244 A. 2d 172 (1968).

 Relator notes in his present petition that he made some effort to submit a Petition for Allocatur to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania but was unable to file his petition within the appropriate 30-day time period. There is no indication here that relator was aware that he could petition the Supreme Court for leave to petition for Allocatur, nunc pro tunc.

 Relator thereafter sought relief by filing his present request for a writ of habeas corpus with this Court. He makes the following claims in his petition:

 
(1) Improper Arrest and Search
 
(2) Denial of a Fair Trial
 
(3) Knowing Use by Prosecutor of Perjured Testimony
 
(4) Obstruction of Direct Appeal
 
(5) Failure to Subpoena Alibi Witness at ...

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.