Commonwealth v. Bridges
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The learned trial judge quashed the indictment because the date laid as that on which the crime was committed was subsequent to the day on which the information was made. He considered this a fatal error. Our court expressed an opinion to the contrary in Com. v. Nailor (No. 2), 29 Pa. Superior Ct. 275. We stated in that case: “In the second count, June 6, 1901, is laid as the date of the offense charged. This is subsequent to the complaint and hearing on which the count is based. Yet being prior to the finding of the indictment, subsequent to the statute describing the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RyhalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Commonwealth v. PowellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Commonwealth v. ColemanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Commonwealth v. NailorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
3Cited by8 opinions
- Commonwealth v. HaimbachSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Commonwealth v. PolinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Commonwealth v. ZeiglerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Commonwealth v. NewcomerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Commonwealth v. SeparitoGreene County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.