Becker v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Oyer and Terminer of Northumberland Connty to review a judgment on a verdict of guilty in an indictment for larceny.
Read the full summary
Error to the Oyer and Terminer of Northumberland Connty to review a judgment on a verdict of guilty in an indictment for larceny. The indictment contained three counts, the first of which was as follows: “The grand inquest of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, inquiring for the connty of Northumberland, upon their oaths and affirmations, respectively, do present that John Becker and August Broskie, late of said county, yeomen, on the 6th day of September, in the year of onr Lord 1886, about the hour of 12 o’clock in the night of the same day, at the county aforesaid, and within the…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :
There was no error in refusing to quash the first count of the indictment Charging burglary with intent to commit larceny and that the larceny was actually consummated does not make the indictment bad for duplicity. It is a well-recognized form of framing a count, both in England and in this country.
The court gave due effect to the evidence of previous good character in designating it to be positive evidence which might of itself pioduce such reasonable doubt as may result in producing an acquittal.
We see no error in the remaining assignment.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. DoranSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Hancock v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1920