Commonwealth v. Farrell
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 442, Jan. T., 1898, by defendant, from judgment of O. & T. Blair Co., March T., 1896, No. 4, on verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree. Indictment for murder.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 442, Jan. T., 1898, by defendant, from judgment of O. & T. Blair Co., March T., 1896, No. 4, on verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree. Indictment for murder. Before Bell, P. J. The circumstances connected with the killing of Henry Bonnecke are fully reported in Commonwealth v. Wilson, 186 Pa. 1. Michael Poet, called on the part of the commonwealth, testified as follows : “ Q. Can you determine from your experience, as you have narrated it, how long a body has been dead or about how long?” Objected to. By the Court: “ Q. Have you had some experience with dead bodies,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Williams,
The indictment in this case charges three persons with the crime of murder in the first degree, in the killing one Honrj Bonnecke. They are the defendant, Prank Wilson and William Doran. Wilson and the defendant were separately tried and Doran has so far escaped arrest. The trial of Wilson resulted in a conviction. A new trial was refused and the case came into this Court by appeal. At the March term, 1896, Farrell, the defendant, was tried and convicted. His application for a new trial was refused and he also appealed. The two appeals were heard in this Court…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
3Cited by32 opinions
- Gibbs v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Roan v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Commonwealth v. SparrowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Commonwealth v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Commonwealth v. BallardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.