Com. ex rel. Geiger v. Maroney

• Decision Date: 29 September 1965
• Citation: 213 A.2d 348,419 Pa. 147
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania ex rel. George GEIGER v. James F. MARONEY, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Page 348

213 A.2d 348

419 Pa. 147

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania ex rel. George GEIGER v. James F. MARONEY, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Sept. 29, 1965.

George P. Geiger, in pro. per.

Richard E. McCormick, Dist. Atty., William F. Caruthers, Asst. Dist. Atty., Greensburg, for appellee.

Before BELL, C. J., and MUSMANNO, JONES, COHEN, EAGEN, O'BRIEN, and ROBERTS, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner challenges his 1960 conviction in reliance on the decision in Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964), and Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L.Ed.2d 1479 (1957). He further alleges a pre-trial deprivation of the right to counsel on the basis of the decision in White v. State of Maryland, 373 U.S. 59, 83 S.Ct. 1050, 10 L.Ed.2d 193 (1963).

We find no merit in petitioner's contentions. Having concluded in Commonwealth v. Negri, 419 Pa. 117, 213 A.2d 670 (1965), that the mandate of Escobedo is not to be given retrospective application, Negri is here controlling. Petitioner's contention in reliance on Mallory is foreclosed by our decision in Commonwealth ex rel. Sleighter v. Banmiller, 392 Pa. 133, 139 A.2d 918 (1958). ^*

Finally, the record fails to disclose any prejudice arising from petitioner's lack of counsel at the preliminary hearing and, therefore, no violation of his constitutional rights resulted. See Commonwealth ex rel. Butler v. Rundle, 416 Pa. 321, 206 A.2d 283 (1965).

Order affirmed.

COHEN, J., dissents.

* See Culombe v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568, 81 S.Ct. 1860, 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961); Gallegos v. State of Nebraska, 342 U.S. 55, 72 S.Ct. 141, 96 L.Ed. 86 (1951).