Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Hradesky

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 15, 1951No. Appeal, 159PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, P. J.,

Frank Hradesky and James Pauli were indicted for attempted extortion, attempted bribery, and conspiracy to commit extortion and bribery. In addition, Hradesky was charged with misconduct in office. Pauli entered a plea of guilty to the charges against him, and became a witness for the Commonwealth at the trial of Hradesky, who was found guilty by a jury. He was sentenced by the Court of Quarter Sessions of Fayette .County. On this appeal from judgment and sentence he does, not question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain Ms conviction, but alleges that certain…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LibonatiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Commonwealth v. NeillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  3. Commonwealth v. DarcySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  4. Commonwealth v. BellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  5. Commonwealth v. ThurmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BarnettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  2. United States v. StironeDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
  3. Commonwealth v. RicciSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  4. Commonwealth v. StaudenmayerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  5. Commonwealth v. O'KickiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API