Commonwealth v. Falls and Sykes
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Each of these defendants was found guilty on six indictments, charging respectively, conspiracy, brib ery, extortion, violation of the liquor laws, malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance in office.
Separate sentences were imposed on each bill, but only one appeal was taken by each defendant. This was contrary to the decisions of this and the Supreme Court. The sentences imposed constituted separate judgments and there should have been separate appeals: DuBois Appeal, 293 Pa. 186; Com. v. Shollenberger, 17 Pa. Superior Ct. 218; Com. v. Pilnik, 29 Pa. Superior Ct. 285. Defendants’…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Dubois's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Commonwealth v. SchollenbergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Commonwealth v. PilnikSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BloseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Commonwealth v. WilcoxSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Ferree v. DouglasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Commonwealth v. PetroSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Riley v. City and County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1958
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.