Summary
In Healey v. Dudley (5 Lans. 115) the court impliedly held that a board of supervisors had the right to pass a resolution rescinding a former resolution granting $500 back pay to a county judge.
Summary of this case from Young v. City of RochesterOpinion
March 6, 1961.
March 13, 1961.
Criminal Law — Practice — Habeas corpus — Moot question — Alleged trial errors — Sentence completely served.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, in which it appeared that relator had completely served a sentence imposed following conviction on an indictment; that he alleged trial errors in the proceedings on this indictment; that he was serving a sentence subsequently imposed on another indictment; and that the court below, holding that the questions raised in the petition for the writ were moot, denied the petition; it was Held that the order of the court below should be affirmed.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ.
Appeal, No. 20, Feb. T., 1961, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, Oct. T., 1960, No. 2119, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Frank E. Dudley v. William B. Healey, Warden. Order affirmed.
Same case in court below: 23 Pa. D. C. 2d 799.
Habeas corpus.
Order entered denying petition for writ, opinion by PINOLA, J. Relator appealed.
Frank E. Dudley, appellant, in propria persona.
Solomon Lubin, Assistant District Attorney, and Vincent M. Quinn, First Assistant District Attorney, for appellee.
Submitted March 6, 1961.
The Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County is affirmed on the opinion of Judge FRANK L. PINOLA for the court below, reported at 23 Pa D. C. 2d 799.