Commonwealth v. Stoltz
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hirt, J.,
It is unfortunate, particularly in cases such as these, where the evidence is entirely sufficient to support the convictions that new trials must be granted because of an unjudicial presentation of the case to the jury by the trial judge.
Defendant was convicted of sodomy on one indictment and of common law rape on another. The cases were tried together. The charge of the court contains this language: “This young girl whose reputation for chastity and morality, peace and good order, is unchallenged ......related to you in detail a story of such cruelty, such savagery and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TrunkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Commonwealth v. DeitrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Commonwealth v. BeckerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Commonwealth v. StelmaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Commonwealth v. SharpeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BartellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Commonwealth v. WilkersonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Commonwealth v. WilkersonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964