Opinion
April 10, 1957.
June 11, 1957.
Criminal law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Trial errors.
Alleged trial errors cannot be considered in a habeas corpus proceeding.
Before RHODES, P.J., HIRT, GUNTHER, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, ERVIN, and WATKINS, JJ.
Appeal No. 57, Oct. T., 1957, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, June T., 1956, No. 738, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Orville J. Barclay v. Frank G. Martin, Warden Eastern State Penitentiary. Order affirmed.
Habeas corpus proceeding. Before TOAL, J.
Order entered dismissing petition. Relator appealed.
Orville J. Barclay, appellant, in propria persona.
Raymond R. Start, District Attorney, with him J. Harold Hughes, First Assistant District Attorney, and Jacques H. Fox, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted April 10, 1957.
This is an appeal from the dismissal (July 9, 1956) of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant thereafter filed a "Petition of Error Coram Nobis", including a second application for a writ of habeas corpus. From the dismissal (September 10, 1956) of this latter petition he has not appealed.
Appellant lists twenty "points wherein his basic constitutional rights were violated". The factual situation is set forth in our opinion affirming appellant's conviction and sentence on a charge of assault with intent to rob. See Commonwealth v. Barclay, 178 Pa. Super. 568, 115 A.2d 405 (1955). The principal contentions which appellant here attempts to raise were discussed and decided adversely to his position in our original opinion. While he has "supplimented [sic] some of the questions originally presented", his complaints all involve alleged trial errors which cannot in any event be considered in a habeas corpus proceeding. We were recently confronted with a similar situation in Commonwealth ex rel. Pierce v. Martin, 183 Pa. Super. 272, 130 A.2d 727.
The order of the court below is affirmed.