Commonwealth v. Dinatale
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Trexler, J.,
The defendants were registrars of election in the city of Philadelphia. They were indicted and convicted of falsely entering into the registry books, the names of persons who did not appear before them for registration.
The first question submitted is, was the testimony of the absent Avitnesses who had testified at the preliminary hearing before the magistrate, admissible? The Commonwealth offered proof to the effect that the persons charged with the duty of serving subpoenas issued for the witnesses called at the last known residences of the witnesses and upon inquiry…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Commonwealth v. RazmusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Delahunt v. United Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Commonwealth v. BoneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Covanhovan v. HartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- Greenan v. EggelingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ingram v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Shields v. Larry Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Delvitto v. SchiavoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Katz v. MontagueSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Commonwealth v. McFeatersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930