Brown v. Commonwealth
This text of 4 Rawle 259 (Brown v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The preceding sentence, though erroneous, was not void. On the contrary, it was in full force, till it was reversed, and [260]*260would protect the officer from an action of trespass for false imprisonment. Having been thus in force, it expired, for all legal purposes, at the time of its reversal, and the period of the•subsequent one which was dependent on it, began to run. The confinement which the prisoner has undergone, therefore, is referrible to the prior sentence, and not to the succeeding one, which taking effect from the termination of the former, is yet in force.
Prisoner remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
4 Rawle 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-commonwealth-pa-1833.