Commonwealth v. Caulfield
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 39, Jan. T., 1905, by defendant, from judgment of Superior Court, Oct. T., 1904, No. 95, affirming judgment of Q. S. Blair Co., June T., 1903, No. 4, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. Phillip E. Caulfield. Appeal from Superior Court. Error assigned was judgment of the Superior Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Although there are a number of other assignments of error, we did not, when we granted the appeal in this case, intend to consider any of them except the one averring the Pennsylvania statute of June 24,1895, P. L. 212 to be unconstitutional. The Superior Court act is imperative upon us in reference to this last averment. As to the other alleged errors we can see nothing of such public importance as calls for our interference with the judgment of the 'Superior Court. As to the unconstitutionality of the act, we have no doubt it is constitutional.
The defendant was indicted in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Plumley v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
3Cited by11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. NelsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Commonwealth v. McDermottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Commonwealth v. ReedSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Commonwealth v. McDermottSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Commonwealth v. DiMeglioSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.