Commonwealth v. Schomaker
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HOFFMAN, Judge:
These are cross appeals from an order granting a new trial on a charge of theft by deception. 1 In its appeal, the Commonwealth contends the jury was properly instructed and therefore seeks reinstatement of the jury’s verdict. Defendant seeks arrest of judgment in his appeal, or alternatively, to uphold the order granting a new trial. Because we agree with defendant that a fatal variance existed between the indictment and the jury instructions, we affirm the order granting a new trial.
The evidence indicated that defendant (an attorney), one of his clients (Todd), and a bail…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Commonwealth v. PopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Commonwealth v. KellySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Commonwealth v. WarfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Commonwealth v. GalloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
- Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Commonwealth v. SchomakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. StarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Commonwealth v. FultonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. ShowersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.