Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Shorteno

Lancaster County Court of Quarter Sessions

Decided January 15, 1927No. 31Published

1Opinion of the Court

Hassler, J.,

The three above-named defendants were ¡harged with, and convicted of, transporting liquor. All were riding in the mtomobile in which the liquor was being transported, when it was stopped >y an ofiicer and the liquor found in it. At the trial, Wilson, who was the >wner of the automobile, and Mackle testified that they did not know that the iquor was in the automobile, it having been put there by Shorteno, who isked Wilson to bring two empty kegs to a friend in Mount Joy, through vhich town they expected to pass. Shorteno denied that he put the liquor *700in the automobile, and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. PezznerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Commonwealth v. WellsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  3. Commonwealth v. VardelleSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

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

Powered by the Exa API