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

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6505 (2026)

 Interference with writ prohibited.

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 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

§ 6505.  Interference with writ prohibited.

Any person who shall fail or refuse to respond to a writ or to an order issued under this chapter, or who shall change the place of detention of any person for the purpose of defeating the writ, or shall, without express authorization from a judge of a court of record, recommit on substantially the same facts and circumstances any person set at large upon a habeas corpus, or shall do any act for the purpose of defeating the writ or the order, commits a misdemeanor of the second degree.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2021 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Carbo, 822 A.2d 60 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Carbo, 822 A.2d 60 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2003). · cites it 2× “42 Pa.C.S. § 6505 (emphasis supplied). ¶ 8 I am of the opinion that the legislature purposely utilized the phrase "facts and circumstances" rather than the phrase "same evidence" when it prohibited the rearrest of an individual released by a judge of the Court of Common Pleas…”
Cook v. Condo, No. 1:21-cv-00361, 2021 WL 5579706 (M.D. Pa. Nov. 30, 2021). · cites it 6× “) Cook brings six claims for relief in his complaint: (1) that Defendants violated 42 Pa.C.S. § 6505 by removing him from the therapeutic community program so as to hinder his ability to obtain habeas corpus relief; (2) that Defendants violated his rights to due process and…”
Com. ex rel. T. Connelly v. R. Gilmore (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2017). · cites it 4× “§6504, and thereby agreed by silence that Connelly is unlawfully detained; and (3) the trial court’s dismissal of the Petition constituted interference with a writ of habeas corpus in violation of section 6505 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §6505. Initially, we note that “a…”
Cook v. Condo, No. 1:21-cv-00361 (M.D. Pa. Nov. 30, 2021). “) Cook brings six claims for relief in his complaint: (1) that Defendants violated 42 Pa.C.S. § 6505 by removing him from the therapeutic community program so as to hinder his ability to obtain habeas corpus relief; (2) that Defendants violated his rights to due process and…”
Com. v. Cobbs, G., No. 423 WDA 2014 (Pa. Super. Ct. Nov. 6, 2014). “Appellant now presents the following question for our review: Did the common pleas court abuse its discretion in disregarding the violation of 42 Pa.C.S. § 6505 presented in a writ of habeas corpus ad subjiciendum and err in considering the foregoing claims cognizable under 42…”
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.