Com. v. Hayden
| Decision Date | 14 June 1973 |
| Citation | 224 Pa.Super. 354,307 A.2d 389 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Robert HAYDEN, Appellant. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Charles REDSHAW, Appellant. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
John J. Dean, John H. Corbett, Jr., Pittsburgh, for Robert hayden.
John J. Dean, John R. Cook, Pittsburgh, for Charles Redshaw.
Robert W. Duggan, Dist. Atty., Robert L. Eberhardt, Asst. Dist. Atty., Pittsburgh, for appellee.
Before WRIGHT, President Judge, and WATKINS, JACOBS, HOFFMAN, SPAULDING, CERCONE and SPAETH, JJ.
Separate appeals were filed by the appellants raising identical contentions and involving the same incident. The sole question is whether the lower court erred in dismissing appellants' PCHA petition without a hearing.
Appellants filed petitions for review under the Post Conviction Hearing Act. In their petitions, appellants alleged that their guilty pleas had been involuntarily and unintelligently made. Originally, appellants tendered guilty pleas to charges of rape, sodomy and aggravated assault and battery. In the colloquy before the trial judge, appellants admitted that in the early morning hours of May 22, 1971 they observed the victim walking down Baum Boulevard in Pittsburgh. Charles Redshaw the appellant, testified that he approached the victim from behind and struck her on the right side of her head with a pipe. Appellant stated that he took her to a waiting car driven by Robert Hayden, the other appellant herein. Redshaw testified that he had sexual intercourse with the victim, but that she offered no resistance. Hayden then said that when they arrived at a secluded cabin, the victim performed oral sodomy on appellant. Appellants argued that her entire behavior and attitude indicated submission, consent and willingness to engage in sexual activities with them.
Appellants now argue that the above testimony presented a defense to the charges against them in the form of consent. They, therefore, allege that their guilty pleas should not have been accepted.
Before accepting the guilty pleas of the appellants, the trial court fully informed appellants of their rights and consequences of the tendered plea. We have examined the entire record, and we conclude that the colloquy was adequate, and the pleas were voluntarily and knowingly made. We further believe that the lower court properly denied appellants' petition for PCHA review without an evidentiary hearing.
The right to an evidentiary hearing on PCHA review is not absolute. Our courts have expressly held that a court may deny such hearing if the claim, as presented by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Sherard
...to a hearing is not absolute. Commonwealth v. Cimaszewski, 234 Pa.Super. 299, 300, 339 A.2d 95, 96 (1975); Commonwealth v. Hayden, 224 Pa.Super. 354, 356, 307 A.2d 389, 390 (1973). Section 9 of the PCHA, 19 P.S. § 1180-9 (Supp.1978-79), "If a petition alleges facts that if proven would enti......
-
Com. v. Rough
...a woman to submit to a carnal act"; active opposition is not a prerequisite to finding lack of consent. Commonwealth v. Hayden, 224 Pa.Super. 354, 356-57, 307 A.2d 389, 390 (1973). See Commonwealth v. Moskorison, 170 Pa.Super. 332, 85 A.2d 644 (1952). Outcry, struggle and fresh complaint ne......
-
Commonwealth v. Thomas
... ... inducing a woman to submit to a carnal act'; active ... opposition is not a prerequisite to finding lack of consent ... Commonwealth v. Hayden, 224 Pa.Super. 354, 356-57, ... 307 A.2d 389, 390 (1973). See Commonwealth v ... Moskorison, 170 Pa.Super. 332, 85 A.2d 644 (1952) ... Outcry, ... ...
-
Com. v. Thomas
...a woman to submit to a carnal act'; active opposition is not a prerequisite to finding lack of consent. Commonwealth v. Hayden, 224 Pa.Super. 354, 356-57, 307 A.2d 389, 390 (1973). See Commonwealth v. Moskorison, 170 Pa.Super. 332, 85 A.2d 644 (1952). Outcry, struggle and fresh complaint ne......