Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Speiser

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 13, 1922No. Appeal, No. 91PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Gawthrop, J.,

This was a prosecution for fornication and bastardy. The indictment charged that defendant “did commit fornication with a certain Harry Speiser and a female bastard child on the body of her, the said Harry Speiser then and there did beget.” Without demurring or moving to quash the indictment, a plea of not guilty was entered, and the trial resulted in a verdict of guilty, on *471Which the court imposed sentence. The questions for decision arise on the appeal from that sentence. The first assignment of error complains that the indictment is defective. The question therefore…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. Keenan & ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871
  2. Commonwealth v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
  3. Seifried v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
  4. Phillips v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
  5. Rough v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. RomesburgSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Commonwealth v. KramerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Commonwealth v. BatchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Commonwealth v. LawtonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  5. Commonwealth v. DiEMIDIOSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962

5 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