Opinion
March 18, 1959.
April 16, 1959.
Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Allegations — Time to prepare for defense — Deprivation of counsel — Perjured testimony — Sufficiency of evidence — Due process.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which relator alleged that he was denied adequate time to prepare his defense, that he was deprived of counsel, that perjured and hearsay testimony was permitted at his trial, that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, and that he was denied due process of law, it was Held, in the circumstances, that the order of the court below dismissing relator's petition should be affirmed.
Before RHODES, P.J., HIRT, GUNTHER, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, ERVIN, and WATKINS, JJ.
Appeal, No. 154, Oct. T., 1959, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 3 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1958, No. 1935, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. James Robertson v. David N. Myers, Warden. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 16 Pa. D. C. 2d 452.
Habeas corpus.
Order entered dismissing petition, opinion by REIMEL, J. Relator appealed.
James Robertson, appellant, in propria persona.
Richard M. Rosenbleeth and Juanita Kidd Stout, Assistant District Attorneys, James N. Lafferty, First Assistant District Attorney, and Victor H. Blanc, District Attorney, for appellee.
Argued March 18, 1959.
The order of the court below dismissing relator's petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed on the opinion of Judge REIMFL of the Court of Common Pleas No. 5 of the County of Philadelphia, as reported in 16 Pa. D. C. 2d 452.