Opinion
March 13, 1961.
March 22, 1961.
Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Forgery — Failure to provide defendant with handwriting expert — Dismissal of prior petition raising same questions.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which it appeared that petitioner complained basically that at the time he was tried and convicted on a forgery charge the district attorney did not provide for him a handwriting expert to testify for the defense, thereby denying due process, and that the matters raised in the instant petition had previously been adjudicated adversely to petitioner in a prior proceeding for a writ of habeas corpus, it was Held that the order of the court below refusing the petition should be affirmed.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ.
Appeal, No. 33, March T., 1961, from order of Court of Common Pleas of York County, Jan. T., 1961, No. 114, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Clark E. Moul v. James F. Maroney, Superintendent. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 23 Pa. D. C. 2d 511.
Habeas corpus.
Order entered refusing petition, opinion by ATKINS, P.J. Relator appealed.
Clark E. Moul, appellant, in propria persona.
Frank B. Boyle, District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted March 13, 1961.
The Order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge GEORGE W. ATKINS for the court below, reported at 23 Pa. D. C. 2d 511.