Com. v. Clark
Citation | 198 Pa.Super. 64,181 A.2d 859 |
Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Alvin CLARK, Appellant. |
Decision Date | 13 June 1962 |
Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
Alvin Clark in pro. per.
Edward C. Boyle, Dist. Atty., William Claney Smith, Asst. Dist. Atty., Pittsburgh, for appellee.
Before RHODES, P. J., and ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY and FLOOD, JJ.
Defendant was charged with violating the Anti-Narcotics Act of July 11, 1917, P.L. 758, as amended, 35 P.S. § 851 et seq., 1 and indicted in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Allegheny County at No. 316, April Sessions, 1960, on April 14, 1960, and at No. 277, May Sessions, 1960, on May 13, 1960. Defendant was subsequently tried, convicted, and sentenced.
A drug addict called defendant in the presence of the police and made arrangements to meet defendant on a street in Rankin, Allegheny County, whereupon defendant was arrested at about 7 p. m. on March 31, 1960, near his room at 205 Miller Street, Rankin. Later that evening the police entered the room at 205 Miller Street, where narcotics were found in a locked box, the key to which defendant had in his possession. This additional room rented by defendant was about a block away from the police station. 2
No motions were made prior to indictment or prior to trial attacking the validity of the search or the admissibility of the evidence.
At the trial defendant's counsel made an oral motion to exclude the narcotics on the ground they were obtained through an illegal search and seizure. The motion was denied. Motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial were filed, and refused by the court below; sentence was deferred and then imposed on August 18, 1961. Defendant has appealed.
Appellant contends that the evidence, including heroin, obtained by the police through a search of his room at 205 Miller Street without a warrant should have been excluded as obtained through an illegal search and seizure, citing in this Court the decision in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081.
Appellant's trial took place on November 7, 1960. His motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial filed on November 14, 1960, raised no question concerning evidence obtained through an alleged illegal search and seizure. Consequently, in its opinion filed on July 18, 1961, the court below, in disposing of appellant's post-conviction motions, did not pass upon the question of evidence obtained through an alleged illegal search and seizure. Subsequently, on August 14, 1961, appellant made a belated and unsuccessful attempt in the court below to raise the question of the admissibility of the evidence obtained through the search.
The record shows that appellant and his counsel knew the nature of the evidence and that it was seized at or about the time of appellant's arrest. See DiBella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121, 82 S.Ct. 654, 7 L.Ed.2d 614; Application of Bogish, 69 N.J.Super. 146, 173 A.2d 906, 909. It may be that the question of the alleged illegally obtained evidence was not timely raised, but the fact that its admission was not properly raised in the court below at all is controlling on appeal. Com. v. Mays, 182 Pa.Super. 130, 126 A.2d 530; Com. v. Gomori, 192 Pa.Super. 325, 330, 161 A.2d 649. Matters not raised by proper post-conviction motions or considered in the court below cannot be invoked on appeal in this Commonwealth even though they involve constitutional questions. Com. v. Klick, 164 Pa.Super. 449, 453, 65 A.2d 440; Com. ex rel. Hellinger v. Day, 178 Pa.Super. 232, 236, 116 A.2d 76, certiorari denied 350 U.S. 941, 76 S.Ct. 316, 100 L.Ed. 821. Hence, application of Mapp v. Ohio, supra, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081, is not here involved. Carter v. Illinois, 329 U.S. 173, 175, 67 S.Ct. 216, 218, 91 L.Ed. 172, 175.
Moreover, in any event, it would seem that the trial court could properly rely on the law at the time of trial and conviction as announced in Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25, 69 S.Ct. 1359, 93 L.Ed. 1782, on the question of illegally obtained evidence in state courts prior to Mapp v. Ohio, supra, 367 U.S. 643, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 6 L.Ed.2d 1081, decided June 19, 1961, and overruling Wolf v. Colorado on this question. 3
As Mr. Justice Frankfurter said in Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217, 235, 236, 237, 80 S.Ct. 683, 695, 4 L.Ed.2d 668, 684, 685, referring to the law announced by the Supreme Court of the United States in the earlier search and seizure cases of Harris v. United States, 331 U.S. 145, 67 S.Ct. 1098, 91 L.Ed. 1399, and United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 70 S.Ct. 430, 94 L.Ed. 653: See Warring v. Colpoys, 74 App.D.C. 303, 122 F.2d 642, 646, 136 A.L.R. 1025 (D.C.Cir.1941), certiorari denied 314 U.S. 678, 62 S.Ct. 184, 86 L.Ed. 543; Gaitan v. United States, 295 F.2d 277 (September 27, 1961); Application of Bogish, 69 N.J.Super. 146, 173 A.2d 906. See, also, Com. v. Scoleri, 399 Pa. 110, 129, 130, 160 A.2d 215.
It would be unjust to hold the trial court to be in error in basing its action on decisions...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Rundle
...U.S. 901, 83 S.Ct. 203, 9 L.Ed.2d 164 (1962), rehearing den. 371 U.S. 959, 83 S.Ct. 498, 9 L. Ed.2d 507 (1963) and Commonwealth v. Clark, 198 Pa.Super. 64, 181 A.2d 859 (1962), in all of which the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania refused allocaturs.13 In these cases the applicability of Mapp v......
-
Com. ex rel. Stoner v. Myers
... ... since it would be unjustifiable retrospective lawmaking to ... convict the trial court of error in relying on the authority ... of decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in ... force at the time of the trial. Com. v. Mancini, 198 ... Pa.Super. 642, 184 A.2d 279; Com. v. Clark, 198 ... Pa.Super. 64, 69, 181 A.2d 859; Abel v. United ... States, 362 U.S. 217, 235, 236, 237, 80 S.Ct. 683, 695, ... 4 L.Ed. 668, 684, 685. See, also, State v. Long, 71 ... N.J.Super. 583, 177 A.2d 609 ... Whatever rule ... may evolve from the decisions as to the application of ... ...
-
United States v. Rundle
...hearing significant enough to make an exception to the well-established rule stated in the above-cited cases. See Commonwealth v. Clark, 198 Pa.Super. 64, 181 A.2d 859 (1962); Commonwealth v. Puntari, 198 Pa.Super. 70, 181 A.2d 719 (1962); Commonwealth v. Mancini, 198 Pa.Super. 642, 184 A.2......
-
United States v. Maroney
...that it rested on illegally obtained evidence which should have been excluded at the trial on the appellant's motion. Commonwealth v. Clark, 198 Pa.Super. 64, 181 A.2d 859. The Court failed to decide the issue raised by the challenge and predicated its affirmance of the judgment on a proced......