Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Hartung Et Ux.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 26, 1944No. Appeals, 111 and 112PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

Defendants, husband and wife, were found guilty in a general verdict on six counts of a single indictment. They were charged with keeping a disorderly house, a bawdy house, and a building for the purpose of prostitution and assignation. All of the charges were related and depended for their proof on the same acts of the defendants. We agree that the evidence does not support a conviction on any count except that of keeping a disorderly house and we will consider that charge alone. The sentences in this case were within the statutory penalty for that offense. If, therefore,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. ClarkSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Commonwealth of Penna. v. DegrangeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. Canole v. AllenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  4. Kerr v. ClementsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Bridgeford v. Groh Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. Harris v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1974
  3. Commonwealth v. McSorleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  4. Commonwealth v. WesleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  5. Commonwealth v. GreerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964

7 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