Commonwealth v. Amelia Fischel

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Amelia Fischel

99 Pa. Super. 352, 1930 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedSeptember 29, 1930

DocketAppeal 193

StatusPublished

This text of 99 Pa. Super. 352 (Commonwealth v. Amelia Fischel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Amelia Fischel, 99 Pa. Super. 352, 1930 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336 (Pa. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

All of the judges who heard this case are of opinion that the evidence in the court below was sufficient to sustain a finding that the appellant was guilty of disorderly conduct within the provisions of the Act of May 2, 1901, P. L. 132. But the trial judge inadvertently did not enter a distinct and unequivocal judgment that she was guilty. Instead, he dismissed the *354 appeal and sustained the decision of tbe magistrate. TMs was not sufficient: Com. v. Congdon, 74 Pa. Superior Ct. 286. The trial in the quarter sessions was de novo and the judge should have found the defendant guilty or not guilty; and if guilty should have imposed such sentence as he deemed proper within the limitation of the statute: Com. v. Benson, 94 Pa. Superior Ct. 10, 14.

The judgment is reversed and the record is remitted to the court below with directions to reinstate the appeal and enter such finding and judgment as the law and evidence require.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam,

All of the judges who heard this case are of opinion that the evidence in the court below was sufficient to sustain a finding that the appellant was guilty of disorderly conduct within the provisions of the Act of May 2, 1901, P. L. 132. But the trial judge inadvertently did not enter a distinct and unequivocal judgment that she was guilty. Instead, he dismissed the *354 appeal and sustained the decision of tbe magistrate. TMs was not sufficient: Com. v. Congdon, 74 Pa. Superior Ct. 286. The trial in the quarter sessions was de novo and the judge should have found the defendant guilty or not guilty; and if guilty should have imposed such sentence as he deemed proper within the limitation of the statute: Com. v. Benson, 94 Pa. Superior Ct. 10, 14.

The judgment is reversed and the record is remitted to the court below with directions to reinstate the appeal and enter such finding and judgment as the law and evidence require.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 Pa. Super. 352, 1930 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-amelia-fischel-pasuperct-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack