Foulke v. Commonwealth
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county : Of May Term 1879, No. 160. Scire facias sur recognisance from the Court of Oyer and Terminer of said county. Charles H. Foulke was< indicted at the August session of 1878, of the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Cumberland county for arson.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland county : Of May Term 1879, No. 160. Scire facias sur recognisance from the Court of Oyer and Terminer of said county. Charles H. Foulke was< indicted at the August session of 1878, of the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Cumberland county for arson. He was subsequently arrested, and entered into a recognisance with Peter Spahr and Stephen F. Weakley, in the sum of $2000, conditioned for his appearance at the November sessions following, to answer the indictment. At the time fixed for his appearance, he failed to appear. An application was made to…
1Opinion of the Court
The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered
2Per curiam
In Scully v. Kirkpatrick, 29 P. F. Smith 331, there was no forfeiture of the bond. The very groundwork of the decision was that the judge had no power to decree such forfeiture, or enter it of record. Here there was a regular, formal forfeiture of the recognisance. The liability of the recognisors was absolutely fixed by it: Mishler v. Commonwealth, 12 P. F. Smith 59. Their remedy was by petition ,to the court below to respite the recognisance. They could have done this under the Act of 1783. Besides, the affidavit showed no good reason why the…
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. HinesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Commonwealth v. FogelmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Commonwealth v. BarrettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Williamson v. KrumbhaarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Commonwealth v. BalsamoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.