Commonwealth v. Moran

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Moran

17 A.3d 918, 610 Pa. 3, 2011 Pa. LEXIS 888

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 13, 2011·No. 818 MAL 2010·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 13th day of April 2011, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Did the trial judge abuse his discretion in refusing to grant petitioner’s request that the jury be instructed that petitioner cannot be convicted of bribery unless the Commonwealth proves that petitioner acted with criminal intent? Could such an error be harmless in a case where the sole issue was whether petitioner acted with criminal intent?

(2) Was the evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that petitioner was guilty of bribery under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4701 in the respect that there was inadequate proof that petitioner acted with criminal intent?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 13th day of April 2011, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Did the trial judge abuse his discretion in refusing to grant petitioner’s request that the jury be instructed that petitioner cannot be convicted of bribery unless the Commonwealth proves that petitioner acted with criminal intent? Could such an error be harmless in a case where the sole issue was whether petitioner acted with criminal intent?

(2) Was the evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that petitioner was guilty of bribery under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4701 in the respect that there was inadequate proof that petitioner acted with criminal intent?

Commonwealth v. Moran, 17 A.3d 918, 610 Pa. 3, 2011 Pa. LEXIS 888 (Pa. 2011).

Pincite

17 A.3d 918 (Commonwealth v. Moran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related