Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. MacHi

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 14, 1982No. 970Published

1ConcurrenceShertz, Judge

I agree with the result reached by the majority. However, rather than reach the issue of whether or not Appellant was tried within the period mandated by Rule 1100, Pa.R.Crim.P., I would affirm on the basis of insufficiency of the evidence.

The. test of sufficiency of evidence is whether, accepting as true all the evidence presented by the prosecution and all reasonable inferences therefrom, which if believed, the jury could properly, base its verdict, it is sufficient in law to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime.

Commonwealth v. Smith, 283 Pa.Super.Ct.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Commonwealth v. BondiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  3. Commonwealth v. LaneSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API