Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. JOSEPH

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 28, 1956No. Appeals, 162 and 163PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Hirt, J.,

The defendants'George and'Paul Joseph were both convicted bn charges of conducting a lottery, and were sentenced. Paul Joseph was also sentenced, concurrently, on his conviction of establishing a gambling place. In these appeals they contend that there is error in the refusal of new trials by the loiver court.

Paul Joseph is the proprietor of a confectionery store on Franklin Avenue, the main street in the business section of Aliquippa, near the entrance to the works of the Jones and Laughlin Steel Corporation. His brother George Joseph works part time in the store. Between…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. DeitrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  2. Commonwealth v. MellonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  3. Selden, Admr. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  4. Gantt v. Cox & Sons Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  5. Commonwealth v. GreenfieldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BartellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  2. Commonwealth v. WebbSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Commonwealth v. GurreriSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API