Commonwealth v. George

13 Pa. Super. 542, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 196
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 24, 1900
DocketAppeal, No. 84
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 13 Pa. Super. 542 (Commonwealth v. George) 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. George, 13 Pa. Super. 542, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 196 (Pa. Ct. App. 1900).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The first assignment of error cannot be sustained. The court is not bound to entertain a motion to direct a verdict of acquittal until the conclusion of all the testimony. The second assignment raises the question as to the sufficiency of the testimony to warrant a conviction. After a careful consideration of the evidence we are not convinced that the court committed error in submitting the question to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed and the record is remitted to the court below .to the end that the sentence be fully carried into -effect.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Heller
64 A.2d 460 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)
Commonwealth v. Kline
9 Pa. D. & C. 448 (Berks County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1926)
Commonwealth v. Sonis Sonis
81 Pa. Super. 205 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 Pa. Super. 542, 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-george-pasuperct-1900.