Criminal law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Preliminary hearing — Speedy trial — False testimony at trial — Due process.
1. In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which relator contended that he was denied due process of law because he was confined for four months and twenty days before he was given a preliminary hearing, he was not given a speedy trial, and a police officer allegedly testified falsely at his trial, it was Held that the writ was properly refused.
2. Commonwealth ex rel. Musser v. Day, 180 Pa. Super. 191, followed.
Submitted November 14, 1955.
OPINION BY WOODSIDE, J., January 17, 1956:
This is an appeal from the refusal of the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County to grant a writ of habeas corpus to the relator, a prisoner at the Western State Penitentiary serving a sentence imposed by the courts of that county.
The prisoner contends that he was denied due process of law because (1) he was confined for four months and twenty days before he was given a preliminary hearing; (2) he was not given a speedy trial; (3) a police officer allegedly testified falsely at his trial.
Judge EVANS stated for the court below that "An examination of the records shows that proceedings were all in accordance with law; and even were this not so, they could not be raised under a petition for a writ of habeas corpus."
The lower court is correct. See Com. ex rel. Musser v. Day, 180 Pa. Super. 191, 119 A.2d 811, and the cases there cited.
Order affirmed.