Commonwealth v. Guida
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Evidence as to the purpose of the payment of the money represented by the check of $500 was improperly excluded: Smith v. Traction Co., 202 Pa. 54. The dying declarations of decedent were incompetent: Com. v. Lockett, 291 Pa. 319; State v. Martin, 248 Pacific 176.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Walling,
This appeal by the defendant, Guiseppe Guida, is from sentence of death on conviction of murder of the first degree. He and John Tillotta were Italians and resided as neighbors in Bristol Borough, Bucks County. Guida, a widower, often visited at Tillotta’s and, the Commonwealth’s evidence tended to show, became so fond of Mrs. Tillotta that, to possess her, he planned the death of Tillotta. Defendant had a distant cousin, Giaccomo Guicciardo, who resided in Brooklyn, New York, and with whom he exchanged visits. The Commonwealth’s evidence is that while this…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MarshallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Kilpatrick v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
- Commonwealth v. PuntarioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Commonwealth v. WinkelmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Commonwealth v. LockettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WayneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Commonwealth v. HomeyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Commonwealth v. KluskaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- State v. Van DuyneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
- Commonwealth v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.