Commonwealth v. Dee
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 27, April T., 1900, by defendant, in suit of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania against Dennis Dee, from judgment of Q. S. Allegheny Co., Sept. Sess., 1896, No. 483, making absolute rule for attachment. Opinion by Orlad y, J. Indictment for fornication and bastardy.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 27, April T., 1900, by defendant, in suit of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania against Dennis Dee, from judgment of Q. S. Allegheny Co., Sept. Sess., 1896, No. 483, making absolute rule for attachment. Opinion by Orlad y, J. Indictment for fornication and bastardy. It appears from the record that defendant pleaded guilty to the indictment and was sentenced to pay a fine of six and one fourth cents, costs of prosecution, certain expenses of the prosecutrix, $15.00, $10.00 for support of child from birth to date, and $1.25 per week for support of child for a period of four years, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady J.,
The defendant pleaded guilty to an indictment for fornica*642tion and bastardy, and, in default of complying with the terms of the sentence imposed he was committed to the county jail. After remaining in jail for over three months he was regularly discharged as an insolvent debtor. Subsequent thereto a rule was granted to show cause why an attachment against the defendant should not issue, and that he should be directed to pay to the prosecutrix the instalments in arrears since his discharge, and to give bond for the payment of further sums according to the terms of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Davis's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1879
- Hellings v. AmeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
3Cited by2 opinions
- Com. Ex Rel. Berardino v. BerardinoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Commonwealth v. GrubeLancaster County Court of Quarter Sessions · 1933