Commonwealth v. Richardson
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Dithrich, J.,
This matter is now before the Court on appeal by appellants from the discharge of a rule to show cause why a writ of coram nobis should not issue. Upon presentation of the petition for the writ, J. Howard Neely, Esquire, was appointed to represent appellants. An answer was filed by the District Attorney of Juniata *356County and tlie matter came on to be heard upon petition and answer. After argument and the filing of briefs, but without the taking of testimony, Troutman, P. J., denied the prayer of the petition and discharged the rule. By agreement of counsel the cases…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HarrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Commonwealth v. ElliottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Commonwealth v. EberhardtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Commonwealth v. BrewerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Com. Ex Rel. Mulligan v. Smith, WardenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TaylorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Commonwealth v. OrsinoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962