Commonwealth v. Yocum

29 Pa. Super. 428, 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 349
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedNovember 20, 1905
DocketAppeal, No. 38
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 29 Pa. Super. 428 (Commonwealth v. Yocum) 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. Yocum, 29 Pa. Super. 428, 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 349 (Pa. Ct. App. 1905).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Neither the 14th section of article Y. of the Constitution, nor the Act of April 17, 1876, P. L. 29, gives an appeal, as a matter of right, in cases of summary convictions. This can only be had upon allowance by the court, which means upon cause shown: Commonwealth v. Eichenberg, 140 Pa. 158; McGuire v. Shenandoah Boro., 109 Pa. 613. Nor is the action of [431]*431the court below, whether granting or refusing the appeal, reversible upon appeal to this court, unless the record shows" an abuse of discretion. To ascertain the cause alleged, reference must be had to the petition: Commonwealth v. Menjou, 174 Pa. 25 ; Thompson v. Preston, 5 Pa. Superior Ct. 154. In this case the order, as printed in the appellant’s paper-book, purports to have been made on November 15,1904, upon a petition from which it appeared to the court that injustice had been done, but the only paper printed in the paper-book which can by any latitude of construction be regarded as a petition, purports to have been made and sworn to on November 16,1904. There is nothing in the record as printed in the paper-book to show with any degree of certainty that this is the petition referred to in the order. The dates tend to show the contrary. Possibly the uncertainty in this regard would have been removed by inspection of the record proper; but we find upon examination that it has not been brought up and filed. Therefore the appeal must necessarily be quashed.

Appeal quashed at appellant’s cost.

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

Related

Commonwealth v. Barnes
217 A.2d 834 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1966)
Commonwealth v. Nescoda
20 Pa. D. & C. 643 (Schuylkill County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1934)
Commonwealth of Pa. v. Hunter
164 A. 113 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Commonwealth v. Kelly
11 Pa. D. & C. 656 (Crawford County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1928)
Com. of Penna. v. Benson
94 Pa. Super. 10 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)
Commonwealth v. Morris
2 Pa. D. & C. 19 (Fayette County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1922)
Commonwealth v. Luckey
31 Pa. Super. 441 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 Pa. Super. 428, 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-yocum-pasuperct-1905.