Commonwealth v. Pennington
95 A. 107, 249 Pa. 536, 1915 Pa. LEXIS 758
Opinion
There is nothing in the three assignments of error before us calling for a reversal of the just judgment pronounced upon the appellant. That judgment has not been assigned as error, but, overlooking this inadvertence, we affirm it, with direction that the record be re* mitted for the purpose of execution.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Commonwealth v. Pennington, 95 A. 107, 249 Pa. 536, 1915 Pa. LEXIS 758 (Pa. 1915).
95 A. 107 (Commonwealth v. Pennington) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Howard
353 A.2d 438 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1976)
Commonwealth v. Johnson
311 A.2d 694 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1973)
Commonwealth v. Smith
275 A.2d 98 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1971)
Commonwealth v. Roberts
60 A.2d 397 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Commonwealth v. Deni
176 A. 919 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Commonwealth v. Wilcox
170 A. 455 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)
Commonwealth v. Del Giorno
154 A. 788 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1931)
Commonwealth v. Martin
153 A. 141 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Commonwealth v. Schoenleber Patterson
96 Pa. Super. 76 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1929)
Commonwealth v. Touri
144 A. 761 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)