Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Sale and possession of drugs — Allegations of petitioner — Insufficient opportunity to prepare defense — More offenses in indictments than charged before magistrate — Use of perjured evidence — Errors in rulings on evidence and in charge to jury.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which it appeared that petitioner, who was convicted and sentenced on indictments charging possession and sale of drugs, alleged (indiscriminately mixing averments of fact and conclusions of law) that he was denied an adequate opportunity to prepare and present a defense and did not have sufficient notice of the accusations against him because he was not informed of the dates of the alleged illegal sales and possession, apparently complaining because he was originally charged with only two offenses before the magistrate but was subsequently indicted for more, and that he was convicted by the use of false evidence, known to be false by representatives of the Commonwealth (which allegation was unsupported by the record or any averments of fact), and that the trial court erred in rulings on evidence and in its charge; and that the court below, holding that petitioner's contentions were without merit, dismissed the petition; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.
Submitted March 18, 1963.
OPINION PER CURIAM, April 18, 1963:
The order of the court below dismissing petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed on the opinion of Judge WATERS of the Court of Common Pleas No. 3 of Philadelphia County, as reported in 29 Pa. D. C. 2d 402.