Opinion
November 13, 1962.
December 13, 1962.
Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Allegations of petitioner — Absence of counsel during rendering of verdict — Refusal of right to poll jury — False and prejudicial statements in charge to jury — Dismissal of prior petitions.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which it appeared that relator, who had been convicted of burglary, alleged that his counsel was not in court at the time of the rendering of the verdict, that he was denied the right to poll the jury, and that the court below used false and prejudicial statements in its charge to the jury; and that the court below, holding that relator's contentions were without merit, that the proper remedy for the alleged errors was by appeal and not by habeas corpus, and that relator's contentions had previously been decided against him in proceedings upon prior petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, dismissed the petition; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ.
Appeal, No. 282, April T., 1962, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Venango County, August T., 1962, No. 44, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Clarence Hamilton, alias William T. Patrick, v. James Maroney, Warden. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 28 Pa. D. C. 2d 564.
Habeas corpus.
Order entered dismissing petition, opinion by BREENE, P.J. Relator appealed.
Clarence Hamilton, appellant, in propria persona.
Harry W. Gent, Jr., District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted November 13, 1962.
This is an appeal from the order of the court below refusing the appellant's eighth petition for a writ of habeas corpus, six of which were filed in the state courts and two in the federal courts. For opinions on two of appellant's cases see Commonwealth ex rel. Hamilton v. Cavell, 188 Pa. Super. 161, 146 A.2d 373 (1958) and United States of America ex rel. Clarence Hamilton v. James Maroney, Warden, Western Penitentiary, 184 F. Supp. 721 (1960).
The order of the court below refusing the writ is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge WILLIAM E. BREENE reported in 28 Pa. D. C.2d 564.