Case Name: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Leverne DOUGLAS, Appellant
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1980-03-20
Citations: 488 Pa. 290
Docket Number: No. 32
Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Leverne DOUGLAS, Appellant.
Judges: Before EAGEN, C. J, and O’BRIEN, ROBERTS, NIX, LARSEN, FLAHERTY and KAUFFMAN, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 488
Pages: 290–292

Head Matter:
412 A.2d 513
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Leverne DOUGLAS, Appellant.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Submitted Jan. 21, 1980.
Decided March 20, 1980.
Thomas J. McGrath, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Robert B. Lawler, Chief, Appeals Division, Steven J. Cooperstein, Philadelphia, for appellee.
Before EAGEN, C. J, and O’BRIEN, ROBERTS, NIX, LARSEN, FLAHERTY and KAUFFMAN, JJ.

Opinion:
OPINION
LARSEN, Justice.
Appellant, Leverne Douglas, was convicted by a jury of murder of the second degree and conspiracy in the fatal stabbing of Raymond Clairborne in Philadelphia on March 9, 1973. Following the denial of post-verdict motions, appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of ten to twenty years on the murder conviction. On direct appeal, the judgment of sentence was affirmed by this Court in Commonwealth v. Douglas, 461 Pa. 749, 337 A.2d 860 (1975).
Thereafter, appellant filed a counseled petition for relief under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act (PCHA). The PCHA court entered an order denying the petition after an evidentiary hearing. No appeal was taken from this order. Appellant then filed a second counseled petition under the PCHA, which petition also was denied after an evidentiary hearing. This appeal followed, in which appellant contends (1) that the lower court erred in finding that appellant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived the right to appeal the denial of his first PCHA petition; and (2) that he is entitled to a new trial on the basis of after-discovered evidence.
After careful examination of the briefs and record, we have found these issues to be without merit.
Order affirmed.
. Sentence was suspended on the conspiracy charge.