Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Poundstone

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 19, 1963No. Appeals, 260 to 263PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Woodside, J.,

The Commonwealth has appealed from the orders sustaining the demurrers made by the defendants who were tried on the charges of bribery and conspiracy.

In the course of the trial, the Commonwealth offered certain evidence which the court refused to admit. At the conclusion of the Commonwealth’s evidence, a demurrer was interposed in each case. The court sustained the demurrers, and subsequently refused to remove them.1

Without the evidence which the Commonwealth offered and which the court refused to admit, there is insufficient evidence to support a conviction of any of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. WoodhouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  2. Commonwealth v. ErnestoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Commonwealth of Pa. v. KolskySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  4. Monongahela Street Railway Co. v. Philadelphia Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Garcia v. Wall & Ochs, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Gonzalez v. AndreasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Gonzalez v. AndreasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Commonwealth v. PoundstoneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  5. Commonwealth v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

1 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