Commonwealth v. Kaufold

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Kaufold

294 A.2d 743, 222 Pa. Super. 275, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1275

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedSeptember 15, 1972

DocketAppeals, 236 and 237

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 294 A.2d 743 (Commonwealth v. Kaufold) 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. Kaufold, 294 A.2d 743, 222 Pa. Super. 275, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1275 (Pa. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The only real issue this case presents is the constitutional validity of the provision of The Vehicle Code *276 that: “The refusal to submit to a chemical test may be admitted into evidence as a factor to be considered in determining innocence or guilt.” 1 Although the courts are in disagreement as to whether such statutes violate the Fifth Amendment or as to whether such evidence is inadmissible on other grounds, 2 the record in this case shows the admission of such evidence in any event is harmless error in light of the uncontradicted testimony of four witnesses, including three police officers, that the appellant was intoxicated.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

1

Act of April 29, 1959, P. L. 58, §824.1, as amended, 75 P.S. §624.1.

2

The Pennsylvania courts have not considered this issue. For a good discussion of the various positions which courts in other jurisdictions have adopted, see State v. Munroe, 22 Conn. Sup. 321, 171 A. 2d 419 (1961) ; Annot., 87 A.L.R. 2d 370 (1963).

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

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The only real issue this case presents is the constitutional validity of the provision of The Vehicle Code *276 that: “The refusal to submit to a chemical test may be admitted into evidence as a factor to be considered in determining innocence or guilt.” 1 Although the courts are in disagreement as to whether such statutes violate the Fifth Amendment or as to whether such evidence is inadmissible on other grounds, 2 the record in this case shows the admission of such evidence in any event is harmless error in light of the uncontradicted testimony of four witnesses, including three police officers, that the appellant was intoxicated.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

1

Act of April 29, 1959, P. L. 58, §824.1, as amended, 75 P.S. §624.1.

2

The Pennsylvania courts have not considered this issue. For a good discussion of the various positions which courts in other jurisdictions have adopted, see State v. Munroe, 22 Conn. Sup. 321, 171 A. 2d 419 (1961) ; Annot., 87 A.L.R. 2d 370 (1963).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.2d 743, 222 Pa. Super. 275, 1972 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-kaufold-pasuperct-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack