Commonwealth v. Miller
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Quarter Sessions of Westmoreland county: Of October Term, 1884, No. 71. Í This was an indictment against Alexander and James Miller for forcible entry and detainer.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Quarter Sessions of Westmoreland county: Of October Term, 1884, No. 71. Í This was an indictment against Alexander and James Miller for forcible entry and detainer. The indictment was in one count, and before plea entered or jury sworn, defendant’s counsel moved to quash on the ground that “Tlio crimes of Forcible Entry and Forcible Detainer are distinct and separate offences under the Criminal Code, and different in the penalties attached, and they cannot be joined in the same count in the indictment, as has been done in this case.” This motion was overruled by the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clark
The defendants were tried on an indictment charging them with forcible entry and detainer; the jury returned a verdict of not guilty, but that the defendants pay the costs. The defendants moved in arrest of judgment that the offences with which they were charged were distinct and separate, that they were coupled in one count, and that the indictment was bad for duplicity. The court sustained the motion and arrested the judgment, and this is assigned for error.
If there be duplicity in this indictment, the defendants may take advantage of the defect by motion in arrest of judgment; if they had…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MentzerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Commonwealth v. HallSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Commonwealth v. KolbSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Commonwealth v. ZeitlerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Commonwealth v. MillerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.