Relator contends he ivas illegally sentenced on six of seven convictions of burglary and receiving stolen goods,, for the reason that the court, having “revoked and vacated”, and nothing more, the sentences it imposed in the session in which he was convicted, lost its power to resentence him in a subsequеnt session.
In February, 1942, relator pleaded guilty and was sentenced, in the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Allegheny County on six sepаrate bills of indictment (No. 107, January Session, 1942, and Nos. 16, 17, 38, 39 and 40, February Session, 1942). Later in that session, the court revoked and vacаted the sentences, but did not *543 suspend or defer sentence or remand relator to be held for sentence. In a subsеquent session, on May 21, 1942, nothing further appearing on the reсord, the court entered upon each indictment an order suspending sentence.
In October, 1943, relator pleаded guilty to another bill of indictment (No. 69, October Session, 1943) charging burglary and receiving stolen goods. The court then, Octobеr 20, 1943, revoked the orders suspending sentences on the formеr bills and imposed sentences thereon totalling not less than ten years nor more than twenty years. On bill No. 69, October Sessiоn, 1943, the court imposed a sentence of not less than fоur years nor more than eight years to run concurrently with the former sentences. Relator does not question this latter sentence, but argues that the sentences on the previous bills were illegal and therefore null and void.
Relator, having сompleted his minimum sentence on bill No. 69, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Superior Court, which the cоurt refused. An allocatur was allowed by this Court, and this appeal followed.
We are unanimously of opinion that the learned Superior Court was in error in their conclusion that thе sentences here involved were legal. The court bеlow sentenced relator on each of the six bills of indiсtment and, in the same session, revoked and vacated each sentence. Nothing appears of record to show that the court did anything to preserve its power tо resentence. It could have availed itself of this right by suspending or deferring sentence or remanding relator to be held for sentence. Failing so to do, its power of resentence expired with the session of court:
Com. ex rel. Nagle v. Smith,
We cannot dischargе the prisoner because he has, as yet, served only the minimum sentence on bill No. 69, October Session, 1943, but we can and will dirеct the vacation of the six illegal sentences.
Judgment оf the Superior Court is reversed and the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Allegheny County is directed to enter an order vacаting the sentences imposed at No. 107, January Session, 1942, and Nos. 16, 17, 38, 39 and 40, February Session, 1942, of that court.