Chase v. Hiatt, 154.
| Decision Date | 02 March 1944 |
| Docket Number | No. 154.,154. |
| Citation | 54 F. Supp. 270 |
| Parties | CHASE v. HIATT, Warden. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania |
Earl V. McLaughlin, of Scranton, Pa., for petitioner.
Frederick V. Follmer, U. S. Atty., of Scranton, Pa., and Herman F. Reich, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Lewisburg, Pa., for respondent.
The defendant was indicted in the Southern District of New York on two counts, charged with possessing and passing a check on which he forged the name of the maker. He pleaded guilty to both counts and, on July 12, 1939, was sentenced to six months' imprisonment on Count One and to two years' probation on Count Two. March 8, 1943, he was arraigned for violation of probation. The probation was revoked, and he was sentenced to two years on Count Two. He is now serving that sentence in the United States Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania.
In this habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner seeks release from further violation on the grounds set forth in his petition. Giving the petitioner the most favorable construction of his petition, it is alleged that at the time of the commission of the offense with which he was charged he was legally unbalanced and could not distinguish right from wrong; that he was convicted on a plea of guilty without counsel while insane; that there was an abuse of due process in that the court and prosecuting authorities knew that he was insane; that he had no attorney; that none was provided for him; that he did not intelligently waive his right to counsel, and that he did not know that he was entitled to that right.
Every one charged with a crime is presumed to be sane. Whether the petitioner was insane at the time of the commission of the crime or at the time of trial was a matter of defense provided the court had jurisdiction to determine the issue. It is conceded that the court did have jurisdiction. As against collateral attack the judgment is valid unless the contrary appears in the record, and such does not appear in the record in the proceedings. Hall v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 86 F.2d 820; Whitney v. Zerbst, 10 Cir., 62 F.2d 970.
The contention of the petitioner as to his insanity might be disposed of without further comment, as it is clearly without merit. However, the respondent saw fit to introduce much evidence as to the sanity of the petitioner and as to all the surrounding circumstances. This evidence is, in my opinion, deserving of some discussion, as it shows beyond question that the rights of the defendant, the petitioner here, were carefully guarded throughout the proceedings.
At the hearing on the rule to show cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be issued, the petitioner's testimony consisted of his oral statements and two letters which indicate that he is a veteran receiving compensation on the basis of a temporary ten percent. disability, and that since 1922 his payments have been made to a conservator appointed for that purpose.
The testimony for the respondent at the hearing included that of a special agent who had originally investigated the charge; the United States Probation Officer who had conducted further investigations, and both the psychiatrist and psychologist of the United States Penitentiary. From this evidence it appears that the petitioner has a long record of violations, including numerous arrests on charges of obtaining money under false pretenses and by means of fraudulent checks; that, when arrested, he repeatedly claimed the defense of insanity and on numerous occasions was sent to hospitals for observation and examination. These included examinations at the Norwich State Hospital, Norwich, Connecticut, and in numerous United States Veterans' hospitals, extending over a period as far back as 1926. At the time of the commission of the offense with which he was charged in the instant case, he was at the United States Veterans Hospital, Castle Point, New York. At times it appeared that he claimed to have tuberculosis; at others that he was subject to epileptic seizures. The case history, as developed in the course of these various investigations, shows that as early as 1926, at the United States Veterans Hospital, Bronx, New York, and in 1928 and 1929, during an examination and further examination on re-admission at the United States Veterans Hospital, Rutland Heights, Massachusetts, the diagnosis was that there was no pulmonary tuberculosis, and insanity was excluded. He was subsequently transferred from the Fitch Soldiers Home, Norton Heights, Connecticut, 1929, and the United States Veterans Hospital, Bronx, New York, without any record of tuberculosis or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brewer v. Hunter, 3478.
...Hall v. Johnston, 9 Cir., 103 F.2d 900; Frame v. Hudspeth, 10 Cir., 109 F.2d 356; McMahan v. Hunter, 10 Cir., 150 F.2d 498; Chase v. Hiatt, D.C., 54 F.Supp. 270. Still other courts have announced the forthright view that one's mental responsibility for an offense, for which he is tried and ......
-
McMahan v. Hunter, 3156.
...Zerbst, supra; Hall v. Johnston, supra; Srygley v. Sanford, 5 Cir., 148 F.2d 264, 265; Myers v. Halligan, 9 Cir., 244 F. 420; Chase v. Hiatt, D.C., 54 F.Supp. 270; State ex rel. Novak v. Utecht, 203 Minn. 448, 281 N.W. 775. Moreover, in this case the trial court's inquiry went far enough to......