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 v. NEWSOME (10/12/71)

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: October 12, 1971.

COMMONWEALTH
v.
NEWSOME, APPELLANT

Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, June T., 1963, No. 14, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Vernon Lee Newsome.

COUNSEL

Charles F. G. Smith, for appellant.

Jerome T. Foerster, Assistant District Attorney, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Bell, C. J., Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy and Barbieri, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice Eagen.

Author: Eagen

[ 444 Pa. Page 587]

This is an appeal from an order entered below denying without hearing appellant's petition for post-conviction relief from the judgment of sentence imposed following his conviction by a jury in Dauphin County, on June 5, 1963, of murder in the second degree.

Following his conviction and sentence, Newsome did not appeal. In 1965, he alleged in habeas corpus proceedings that he had been unlawfully deprived of his

[ 444 Pa. Page 588]

    appeal rights, but after an evidentiary counseled hearing*fn1 the trial court ruled that since Newsome had been fully and timely advised of his right to appeal, he knowingly and intelligently waived this right. We subsequently affirmed this ruling, 428 Pa. 141, 236 A.2d 763 (1968).

The only reasons asserted in the instant petition why relief should be granted are: (1) Petitioner's arrest was illegal because it was based on the coerced statement of his girl friend; (2) The trial court erred in denying a motion to sequester the witnesses at trial; and, (3) Petitioner's right to be tried by an impartial jury was prejudiced because a prospective juror (who was excused for cause) stated during voir dire examination in the hearing of the entire panel that "according to my mind, I think the man is guilty." These complaints are not cognizable in a collateral attack on the conviction and judgment. They pertain to trial error which may be challenged only in a direct appeal. And as noted before, we have ruled that Newsome knowingly and intelligently waived his right to such an appeal.

Order affirmed.

Disposition

Order 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.