Pa. Cons. Stat. » 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. (JUDICIARY) / Chapter 65
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6501 (2026)

 Writ not to be suspended.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

 

 

CHAPTER 65

HABEAS CORPUS

 

Sec.

6501.  Writ not to be suspended.

6502.  Power to issue writ.

6503.  Right to apply for writ.

6504.  Return on writ.

6505.  Interference with writ prohibited.

 

Enactment.  Chapter 65 was added July 9, 1976, P.L.586, No.142, effective 60 days from the date of final enactment of the act of April 28, 1978, P.L.202, No.53.

§ 6501.  Writ not to be suspended.

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in the case of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases, 1988–2020 · leading case: Coady v. Vaughn, 770 A.2d 287 (Pa. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Coady v. Vaughn, 770 A.2d 287 (Pa. 2001). · cites it 4× “I join the majority opinion, however, I write separately to address another potential avenue of review, also not clearly foreclosed under Pennsylvania law, for a claim that a denial of parole resulting from an alleged change in parole guidelines violated the ex post facto clause…”
Commonwealth v. Brown, 943 A.2d 264 (Pa. 2008). · cites it 4× “The availability of habeas corpus review in instances where the PCRA effectively is unavailable is a point I have addressed in other cases. See Coady v. Vaughn, 564 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. O'Berg, 880 A.2d 597 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 4× “The PCRA's focus on affording relief only for those facing actual restraints upon their freedom—irrespective of the constitutional claims they would raise—is consistent not only with common law notions of habeas corpus review, but also with the general state habeas corpus…”
Commonwealth v. Hackett, 956 A.2d 978 (Pa. 2008). · cites it 2× “[9] Appellee also alleged in his supplemental PCRA petition that he was entitled to relief on his Batson claim under the state habeas corpus statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 et seq. He further contended that the grant of relief to Spence while denying him relief for the same…”
Commonwealth v. Turner, 80 A.3d 754 (Pa. 2013). · cites it 2× “The legislature’s exclusion from collateral relief of individuals whose liberty is no longer restrained is consistent with the eligibility requirements of habeas corpus review under the general state habeas corpus statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 et seq. 9 See, e.g., *767 Ahlborn, 699…”
Commonwealth v. West, 938 A.2d 1034 (Pa. 2007). · cites it 2× “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 (the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended .”
Commonwealth v. Haag, 809 A.2d 271 (Pa. 2002). · cites it 2× “Thus, even assuming that a second PCRA petition offers a theoretical means for appellant to raise claims that could not have been raised in his first petition due to his incompetence, appellant may find himself unable to negotiate this narrow avenue of review as a practical…”
Commonwealth v. Cunningham, 81 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2013). “7 To the extent that is so, however, there is at least some basis in law for an argument that the claim is cognizable via a petition under Pennsylvania’s habeas corpus statute, found at 42 Pa.”
Winklespecht v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Prob. & Parole, 813 A.2d 688 (Pa. 2002). · cites it 2× “, concurring), which was joined by Madame Justice Newman, I am inclined to believe that non-frivolous constitutional challenges to the *693 denial of parole are cognizable under Pennsylvania's habeas corpus statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 et seq. See also Commonwealth v.”
Commonwealth v. Seskey, 86 A.3d 237 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2014). “One such thought included a suggestion that the post -Miller inequity might be pursued through a petition under Pennsylvania’s habeas corpus statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 (“The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in the case of rebellion or…”
Commonwealth v. Judge, 916 A.2d 511 (Pa. 2007). “”); 42 Pa.C.S. § 6501 (same). Further, Appellant asserts that the traditional purposes of habeas corpus are advanced by addressing his claims regarding his deportation from Canada in violation of the ICCPR outside the framework of the PCRA, as the writ of habeas corpus is at the…”
Commonwealth Ex. Rel. James Dadario v. Goldberg, 773 A.2d 126 (Pa. 2001). “42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6501 — 05. 2 . This section of the Post Conviction Relief Act (PCRA) formerly read: (a) Genera] Rule — To be eligible for relief under this subchapter, a person must plead and prove by a preponderance of the evidence all of the following: (2) That the conviction or…”
Show all 31 citing cases →
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6501(a) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Haun, 32 A.3d 697 (Pa. 2011).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.