Commonwealth v. Tucker
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
*66Dissenting Opinion by
Watkins, J.:
The statement of the charge, verdict and the act under which the charge was brought are accurately set forth in the majority opinion. However, the evidence produced at the trial does not support the statement that the defendant at the time of the incident, forming the basis of the charge, was conducting a collection business in New Castle under the name of Ideal Credit Adjusters.
In the indictment the defendant was specifically charged that “on or about the 9th day of June . . . (1957) . . . unlawfully did by means of his collection agency coerce and intimidate…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MaloneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Commonwealth v. BarnakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Commonwealth v. CanoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Commonwealth v. GiambroneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Commonwealth v. GregorySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.