Com. ex rel. Hatton v. Dye

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Writing for the CourtBefore STERN; CHIDSEY
Citation373 Pa. 502,96 A.2d 127
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH ex rel. HATTON v. DYE, Warden.
Decision Date22 April 1953

Page 127

96 A.2d 127
373 Pa. 502
COMMONWEALTH ex rel. HATTON
v.
DYE, Warden.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
April 22, 1953.

[373 Pa. 503] James F. Malone, Jr., Dist. Atty., Albert A. Fiok, Asst. Dist. Atty., Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Albert Martin, Pittsburgh, for appellee.

Henry R. Smith, Jr., Owen B. McManus, Jr., Pittsburgh, amicus curiae.

Before STERN, C. J., and STEARNE, JONES, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ.

CHIDSEY, Justice.

This is an appeal by the Commonwealth from the order of the court below which discharged Everett Hatton on a writ of habeas corpus. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has filed a brief amicus curiae.

[373 Pa. 504] On February 19, 1930 the relator, then seventeen yars old, was convicted in Jones County, Mississippi, of assault with intent to rape and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On July 15, 1943 Hatton, a Negro, escaped from the state penitentiary in Parchman, Mississippi, and eventually settled in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where he married and became the father of two children. On May 15, 1952 he was arrested and charged by his wife with assault and battery. Subsequent to this arrest it was discovered that Hatton was a fugitive from justice from the State of Mississippi, and in due time a request for extradition was forwarded from the State of Mississippi to the Governor of Pennsylvania. On June 6, 1952 the Governor's warrant duly issued and was executed.

Thereafter relator filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Common Pleas Court of Allegheny County alleging that he was unlawfully restrained of his liberty in violation of his constitutional rights. He later filed a supplemental petition in which he admitted being the person demanded by the State of Mississippi but denied guilt of the charge for which he was there imprisoned. The supplemental

Page 128

petition also alleged that his trial was a mockery of justice; that he was not represented by counsel; that while he was in the state penitentiary in Mississippi he was the victim of cruel and inhuman treatment; and that if he were returned, his life would be in danger at the hands of his jailors.

At the hearing evidence of the circumstances of his conviction was introduced over the objection of the Commonwealth. Similarly, over objection appellee introduced evidence of physical punishment which he had received and which a part of the penal system in Mississippi. Two employes of the institution where relator had been incarcerated in Mississippi testified at the hearing on the petition, and on the basis of all [373 Pa. 505] of the testimony the trial judge found facts which supported the allegations in the petition, the prayer of which was granted and the relator ordered to be discharged.

The Commonwealth contends that the hearing judge exceeded the scope of permissible inquiry on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in an extradition proceeding by considering the facts and circumstances surrounding relator's conviction and the prison treatment accorded him in the demanding state.

Relator concedes that he is the individual charged with the crime in Mississippi and does not contend that the extradition papers were not validly executed by the Governors of the respective states. However, relator's position is that the wxtradition requisition from the demanding state affirmatively shows a denial of due...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Com. ex rel. Kelly v. Santo
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 28 Noviembre 1969
    ...Turley, 399 Pa. 458, 160 A.2d 685; Commonwealth ex rel. Dronsfield v. Hohn, 390 Pa. 434, 135 A.2d 757; Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127; Commonwealth ex rel. Henderson v. Baldi, 372 Pa. 463, 93 A.2d These requirements are impliedly approved in the majority Opinio......
  • Com. ex rel. Raucci v. Price
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 13 Noviembre 1962
    ...Turley, 399 Pa. 458, 160 A.2d 685; Commonwealth ex rel. Dronsfield v. Hohn, 390 Pa. 434, 135 A.2d 757; Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127; Commonwealth ex rel. Henderson v. Baldi, 372 Pa. 463, 93 A.2d Section 20 of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act is particular......
  • Com. ex rel. Brown v. Baldi
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 4 Junio 1954
    ...if he were returned to the demanding State he would be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. In Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127, 128, the same ruling was made, and it was stated that 'The obvious intendment of the Uniform [Criminal] Extradition Act and the ......
  • Com. ex rel. Colcough v. Aytch
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 3 Abril 1974
    ...danger if he were returned to Mississippi to face charges of escape from prison was held irrelevant in Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127 (1953); Accord Commonwealth ex rel. Huey v. Dye, 373 Pa. 508, 96 A.2d 129 (1953); And see Sweeney v. Woodall, 344 U.S. 86, 73 S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Com. ex rel. Kelly v. Santo
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 28 Noviembre 1969
    ...Turley, 399 Pa. 458, 160 A.2d 685; Commonwealth ex rel. Dronsfield v. Hohn, 390 Pa. 434, 135 A.2d 757; Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127; Commonwealth ex rel. Henderson v. Baldi, 372 Pa. 463, 93 A.2d These requirements are impliedly approved in the majority Opinio......
  • Com. ex rel. Raucci v. Price
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 13 Noviembre 1962
    ...Turley, 399 Pa. 458, 160 A.2d 685; Commonwealth ex rel. Dronsfield v. Hohn, 390 Pa. 434, 135 A.2d 757; Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127; Commonwealth ex rel. Henderson v. Baldi, 372 Pa. 463, 93 A.2d Section 20 of the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act is particular......
  • Com. ex rel. Brown v. Baldi
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • 4 Junio 1954
    ...if he were returned to the demanding State he would be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. In Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127, 128, the same ruling was made, and it was stated that 'The obvious intendment of the Uniform [Criminal] Extradition Act and the ......
  • Com. ex rel. Colcough v. Aytch
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 3 Abril 1974
    ...danger if he were returned to Mississippi to face charges of escape from prison was held irrelevant in Commonwealth ex rel. Hatton v. Dye, 373 Pa. 502, 96 A.2d 127 (1953); Accord Commonwealth ex rel. Huey v. Dye, 373 Pa. 508, 96 A.2d 129 (1953); And see Sweeney v. Woodall, 344 U.S. 86, 73 S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT