Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Rednock

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 11, 1949No. Appeal, 156PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Ross, J.,

The defendant was tried on an indictment charging fornication and bastardy. The testimony of the prosecutrix that he was the father of her child was denied by the defendant, who testified that he never had intercourse with her. Two of his friends testified that they had intercourse with the prosecutrix about the time the child was conceived, which was denied by her. The jury accepted her testimony as true, disbelieved the testimony of the defendant and his witnesses and returned a verdict of “guilty as indicted”. The defendant’s motion for a new trial was refused and he…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. YoungSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. Commonwealth v. JodlowskySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PewattsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  2. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Roberts v. KeenanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  3. Commonwealth v. ShookSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  4. Commonwealth v. MarcinekNorthumberland County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1952
  5. Commonwealth v. Hertel, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lycoming County1972

2 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