Commonwealth v. Fox
Opinion of the Court
— Defendants were sentenced by a justice of the peace upon a summary conviction, for violation of the Act of June 7, 1901, P. L. 492, known as the Professional Thieves Act. The following day, counsel for defendants filed a petition for allow
The motion to quash is based upon the provisions of the Act of May 22,1895, P. L. 100, sec. 1, 42 PS §958, which supplements the Act of March 20, 1810, P. L. 208, 5 Sm. L. 161, and relates to civil actions only: Commonwealth v. Mountain, 64 Pitts. 340; Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 20 Montg. 49; Commonwealth ex rel. v. Betts, 76 Pa. 465.
Certiorari to courts not of record is allowed solely by constitutional authority. Article 5, see. 10, of the Constitution of Pennsylvania provides:
“The judges of the courts of common pleas, within their respective counties, shall have power to issue writs of certiorari to justices of the peace and other inferior courts not of record, and to cause their proceedings to be brought before them, and right and justice to be done.”
Valentine on Subordinate Courts in Pennsylvania, 688, sec. 362, says: “Special allowance of certiorari in penal actions is not required.” Commonwealth v. Antone, 22 Pa. Superior Ct. 412, decides a certiorari is not a writ of course, but obtainable at the prayer of the defendant upon proper motion. Therefore, a special allowance from the court of common pleas must be had for a writ of certiorari. This petition praying for a writ of certiorari must
We are of the opinion, therefore, that the Commonwealth’s motion to quash the petition for writ of certiorari is without merit and should be refused.
And now, November 22, 1937, for the foregoing reasons, the motion to quash defendants’ petition for allowance of writ of certiorari is hereby overruled and refused, and it is ordered and directed that a certiorari issue, directed to Isaac L. Kehoe, Esq., a justice of the peace of the Borough of Norristown, Montgomery County, Pa., requiring him to certify and send the record of the proceedings before him, wherein the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania was complainant and Joseph Fox and Jacob Blum were defendants, so that he have it before the judges of our court on or before Friday, December 3, 1937, at 10 a.m.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.