Commonwealth v. Duffy
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 121, Oct. T., 1911, by defendants, from judgment of Q. S. Phila. Co., April T., 1910, No. 288, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. Thomas J. Duffy, John J. Lynch, John D. Sweeney, Charles Shobert and Richard Debussey. Indictment for conspiracy.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 121, Oct. T., 1911, by defendants, from judgment of Q. S. Phila. Co., April T., 1910, No. 288, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. Thomas J. Duffy, John J. Lynch, John D. Sweeney, Charles Shobert and Richard Debussey. Indictment for conspiracy. Before Willson, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court: When Solomon Cole was on the stand he was asked this question: “Q. When they took you to the desk, what did they say or do? A. One of the men said, ‘ Don’t slate them.’ Q. Said what? A. Don’t slate them.” Mr. Scott: “Q. Where was this?” Mr. Taulane:…
1DissentBice, P. J.
It cannot be contended that there was not sufficient competent testimony in the case to warrant the jury, if they believed it, in finding the defendants guilty. The grounds upon which the judgment is to be reversed and the cause sent back for a retrial are, that the court erred (1) in the admission of incompetent evidence, and (2) in its charge to the jury. Being unable to concur in the judgment, it seems right, in view of the very able discussion of *369the case in the opinion of the majority, that I should at least state the grounds of my dissent.
1.1 am of opinion that the first and second…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Phelps v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Curtis v. WinstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Haines v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
- Haines v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
- Commonwealth v. JohnstonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910