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.

COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. JAMES MORROW A/K/A JAMES BROWN (02/03/84)

submitted: February 3, 1984.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
JAMES MORROW A/K/A JAMES BROWN, APPELLANT



No. 03654 Philadelphia 1982, APPEAL FROM THE PCHA ORDER OF DECEMBER 16, 1982 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY, CRIMINAL NO. 1114-1116 JULY 1969.

COUNSEL

Robert A. Rovner, Feasterville, for appellant.

Jane Cutler Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Cirillo, Beck and Johnson, JJ. Beck, J., concurs in the result.

Author: Cirillo

[ 326 Pa. Super. Page 444]

This appeal is from an order denying the appellant's second petition for relief under the Post Conviction Hearing Act.*fn1

In February of 1970, the appellant was convicted by a jury of forceable rape and burglary with intent to commit a

[ 326 Pa. Super. Page 445]

    felony. After the denial of post-verdict motions, the appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than three nor more than ten years. The appellant appealed to the Superior Court, which resulted in the affirmation of the judgment of sentence. Commonwealth v. Morrow, 218 Pa. Super. 848, 279 A.2d 310 (1971).

On April 5, 1976, the appellant filed his first PCHA petition. The Honorable Ethan Allen Doty denied relief after a hearing and this Court affirmed the order. Commonwealth v. Morrow, 262 Pa. Super. 632, 396 A.2d 851 (1978). On August 4, 1980 the appellant filed his second PCHA petition. After argument, the Honorable Edward J. Blake again denied relief. This appeal followed.

Following his arrest, the appellant signed a waiver of counsel form and then took part in a line-up. In his first PCHA petition, the appellant alleged that a police officer had tricked him into signing the waiver by misinforming the appellant that he was signing a form required for obtaining a lawyer.

The appellant maintains in this appeal that his first PCHA counsel was ineffective for not pursuing the issue of waiver and eliciting more information during the hearing on this subject. Our appellate courts have uniformly held that counsel will not be deemed ineffective for failing to raise baseless or frivolous issues. Commonwealth v. Anderson, 501 Pa. 275, 461 A.2d 208 (1983); Commonwealth v. Williams, 500 Pa. 226, 455 A.2d 632 (1983); Commonwealth v. Courts, 315 Pa. Super. 108, 461 A.2d 820 (1983); Commonwealth v. Hankins, 314 Pa. Super. 7, 460 A.2d 346 (1983). Prior to the line-up, police read the arrest warrant to the appellant, including the terms of the waiver. They told him that he had a right to the presence of counsel and would be provided a lawyer if he could not afford one. The appellant acknowledged that ...


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.