Opinion
September 10, 1962.
November 15, 1962.
Criminal Law — Practice — Writ of error coram nobis — Allegations of petitioner — Trial in absence of defendant's witnesses — Belief that motion for new trial was still pending.
In a proceeding upon a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, in which it appeared that petitioner alleged that he was induced to proceed to trial in the absence of several of his principal witnesses, that had these witnesses testified they would have shown that petitioner was not guilty, and that he never did withdraw his motion for a new trial and, when sentence was imposed, thought the motion for new trial was still pending; and that the court below, holding that petitioner's allegations were without merit, 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. 331, Oct. T., 1962, from order of Court of Quarter Sessions of Montgomery County, Nov. T., 1960, No. 302, in case of Commonwealth v. Willie Alexander. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 28 Pa. D. C. 2d 448.
Proceeding upon petition of relator for writ of error coram nobis.
Order entered dismissing petition, opinion by FORREST, P.J. Relator appealed.
Willie Alexander, appellant, in propria persona.
William C. Cahall, III, Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted September 10, 1962.
The order of the court below dismissing petition for writ of error coram nobis is affirmed on the opinion of President Judge FORREST, as reported in 28 Pa. D. C.2d 448.