Com. ex rel. Davis v. Russell
| Decision Date | 01 July 1964 |
| Citation | 202 A.2d 306,415 Pa. 119 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH ex rel. Jimmie Lee DAVIS, Appellant, v. Harry E. RUSSELL, Superintendnet, State Correctional Institution, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Jimmie Lee Davis, Huntingdon, for appellant.
Thomas M. Reed, Chief Asst. Dist. Atty., Philadelphia, for appellee.
Gordon Gelfond Asst. Dist. Atty., Arlen Specter Asst. Dist. Atty Chief, Litigation Division, F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Jr., First Asst. Dist. Atty., James C. Crumlish, Jr., Dist. Atty Philadelphia, for appellee.
Before BELL, C. J., and MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN O'BRIEN and ROBERTS, JJ.
On April 18, 1962, after being advised by the court of the consequences of his plea, appellant, represented by two able counsel, entered a plea of guilty to murder generally. The Commonwealth certified that the evidence would rise no higher than murder in the second degree, and the court proceeded to take testimony to determine the degree to guilt and the sentence to be imposed.
On September 26, 1961, appellant and the victim had an argument in a poolroom. Appellant left, but indicated he would return. He was intoxicated at the time of the argument. Approximately twenty minutes later, appellant, still intoxicated, returned with a shotgun. The owner of the poolroom testified that appellant first pointed the weapon at him. As the victim started to leave, appellant turned in his direction, asked, 'Where are you going?' and shot him in the side. It was stipulated that death resulted from this wound.
Appellant testified and contended that the weapon was accidentally fired when the victim grabbed it. Appellant stated that he couldn't 'actually say' whether or not he pulled the trigger.
The trial court concluded that appellant was guilty of murder in the second degree and imposed a sentence of not less than ten nor more than twenty years. No motion to withdraw the plea was made, and no appeal followed.
On June 18, 1963, appellant filed the petition for writ of habeas corpus which is now before us. It was denied without a hearing.
Petitioner contends that the evidence was not sufficient to support the judgment of the court and that the victim's death was accidental. Furthermore, he urges that the sentence imposed does not fit the offense charged.
Appellant, in this Court, attached a supplemental petition raising matters which do not appear of record in the court below and which we shall not pass upon...
To continue reading
Request your trial