Opinion
March 22, 1961.
April 13, 1961.
Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Allegations — Prosecutor over-zealous — Trial judge not impartial — Evidence insufficient to warrant conviction — Habeas corpus not substitute for appeal.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which it appeared that petitioner alleged that the prosecutor was over-zealous in the prosecution and conduct of the trial, that the trial judge did not fairly and impartially hear the case, and that the evidence against petitioner was insufficient to warrant his conviction; and that the court below, holding that there was no substance to any of petitioner's contentions and, also, that habeas corpus was not the appropriate remedy, 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. 95, Oct. T., 1961, from order of Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, Sept. T., 1960, No. 2691, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. William Harris v. David N. Myers, Superintendent. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 23 Pa. D. C. 2d 701.
Habeas corpus.
Order entered dismissing petition, opinion by GUERIN, J. Relator appealed.
William Harris, appellant, in propria persona.
Anthony J. Smith and Arlen Specter, Assistant District Attorneys, Paul M. Chalfin, First Assistant District Attorney, and James C. Crumlish, Jr., District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted March 22, 1961.
The order of the court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge GUERIN of the Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, as reported in 23 Pa. D. C. 2d 701.