Commonwealth v. Toledo, 331 A.2d 888

Opinion by

Spaeth, J.,

This is an appeal from a denial without hearing of relief under the ‍‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‍Post Conviction Hearing Act, Act of January 25, 1966, P. L. (1965) 1580, §1 et seq., 19 P.S. §1180-1 et seq. (Supp. 1974-75). All of the issues raised are rephrasing of issues ‍‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‍previously raised on direct appeal when the conviction was affirmed. Commonwealth v. Toledo, 221 Pa. Superior Ct. 752, 289 A.2d 112 (1972), allocatur refused, 221 Pa. Superior Ct. xlv (1972). As the issues have thus ‍‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‍been “finally litigated,” §§4(a)(2) and (3) of the Act, supra, 19 P.S. §§1180-4(a) (2), (3) (Supp. 1974-75), appellant is not “eligible for relief,” id., §3(d), 19 P.S. §1180-3(d) (Supp. 1974-75); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 452 Pa. 376, 305 ‍‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‍A.2d 9 (1973).

Appellant’s claim that perjured testimony was used against him is merely a renewal of a previous attack on the credibility of the witness and thus does not ‍‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌‍present an issue of after-discovered evidence. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Mosteller, 446 Pa. 83, 284 A.2d 786 (1971).

Order affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Commonwealth v. Toledo

Court Name: Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Date Published: Dec 11, 1974

Citations: 331 A.2d 888; 230 Pa. Super. 447; 1974 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2480; Appeal, 1034

Docket Number: Appeal, 1034

Court Abbreviation: Pa. Super. Ct.