Commonwealth v. Gittelman, (No. 2)

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Gittelman, (No. 2)

83 Pa. Super. 322, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 131

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 2, 1924

Docket2; Appeal, 90

StatusPublished

This text of 83 Pa. Super. 322 (Commonwealth v. Gittelman, (No. 2)) 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. Gittelman, (No. 2), 83 Pa. Super. 322, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 131 (Pa. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The charge against the defendant in this case was similar to that in No. 89, October Term, 1924, in which an opinion is now filed. The cases were tried and argued together and involve identical questions. The affirmance of the judgment in No. 89, October Term, 1924, requires a similar action in this case.

The assignments are overruled; the judgment is affirmed and the record remitted to the court below and it is ordered that the defendant appear in the court below at such time as he may be there called and that he be by that court committed until he has complied with the sentence or any part of it which had not been performed at the time the appeal in this case was made a supersedeas.

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

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The charge against the defendant in this case was similar to that in No. 89, October Term, 1924, in which an opinion is now filed. The cases were tried and argued together and involve identical questions. The affirmance of the judgment in No. 89, October Term, 1924, requires a similar action in this case.

The assignments are overruled; the judgment is affirmed and the record remitted to the court below and it is ordered that the defendant appear in the court below at such time as he may be there called and that he be by that court committed until he has complied with the sentence or any part of it which had not been performed at the time the appeal in this case was made a supersedeas.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 Pa. Super. 322, 1924 Pa. Super. LEXIS 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-gittelman-no-2-pasuperct-1924.