Commonwealth v. Degeorge
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Appellant was convicted of obtaining money under false pretenses in circumstances which need not be stated in view of the conclusion reached by this, court concerning the assignments of error. The first assignment violates Rule 28; the second violates Rule 22; both are therefore dismissed.
We'may however say that the first is to the refusal to grant appellant’s motion, made at the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s case that the court direct the jury to find ia verdict of not guilty. As defendant did not rest, the refusal of the motion was proper, but such refusal cannot be assigned…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. PalarinoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Commonwealth v. RuffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Commonwealth v. JohnsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Commonwealth v. SzockiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Commonwealth v. WalterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.