Commonwealth v. Cornelly
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 29, Feb. T., 1898, by defendant, from sentence of Q. S. Center Co., Aug. Sess., 1897, No. 9, on verdict of guilty. Indictment for attempting to burn building. Before Love, P. J. Tbe defendant was indicted for the burning of an electric light building, and under a separate indictment for attempting to burn an armory, both situated in Belief on te.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 29, Feb. T., 1898, by defendant, from sentence of Q. S. Center Co., Aug. Sess., 1897, No. 9, on verdict of guilty. Indictment for attempting to burn building. Before Love, P. J. Tbe defendant was indicted for the burning of an electric light building, and under a separate indictment for attempting to burn an armory, both situated in Belief on te. Both cases were tried before the same jury and the defendant was acquitted of the charge of burning the electric light building but was convicted for the attempt to burn the armory. The testimony largely relied upon by the commonwealth to…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Smith, J.,
The defendant, by separate indictments, was charged with burning an electric light plant and with attempting to burn an armory; and the issues were tried together. On the former indictment, the defendant was acquitted; on the latter he was convicted.
The instruction respecting testimony as to the reputation for truth and veracity, which is assigned for error in the first specification, consists of a passage quoted verbatim from the opinion of the Supreme Court in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51. The only merit of this specification is its novelty. The principles thus cited and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Morss v. PalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1850