Commonwealth v. Andrews
Citations
- 234 Pa. 597
- 83 A. 412
- 1912 Pa. LEXIS 695
Syllabus
<p>Criminal law — Murder—Evidence—Alibi—Erroneous charge.</p> <p>1. Where the main purpose of evidence adduced by a defendant in a murder trial is to establish an alibi, but not the only purpose, it is error for the court in its charge to confine the effect of such evidence to the one purpose of establishing the alibi.</p> <p>2. On the trial of an indictment for murder where the evidence against the prisoner is purely circumstantial, and the defendant offers evidence for the purpose in part of establishing an alibi, it is error for the court to charge in such a way as to leave the jury to understand that they are to scrutinize more closely the evidence offered to show absence of the defendant from the scene of murder when perpetrated, than that offered to show his presence at the time, on the ground that the former was open to the suspicion that it was the product of subornation and perjury.</p> <p>3. The measure of proof when the sufficiency of evidence offered to establish an alibi is the question, is simply that it shall be satisfactory. It need not be beyond doubt. Where the evidence raises a balancing question, and the mind is brought to determine its preponderance, there may be a doubt still existing in the mind, yet the actual weight may be with the prisoner; and this proof will be considered satisfactory.</p> <p>4. Proof of an alibi is as much a traverse of the crime charged, as any other defense, and proof tending to establish it while not clear, may, nevertheless with other facts of the case, raise doubt enough to produce an acquittal.</p> <p>Criminal law — Murder—Good reputation — Charge—Motive— Reasonable doubt.</p> <p>5. On the trial of an indictment for murder where twenty or more witnesses testify to the good character of the accused, the charge is wholly inadequate as to such testimony where it merely says “some twenty witnesses were called upon the part of the defendant to testify to the general good character of the defendant, as a peaceable, law-a
Judges: Brown, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter, Stewart
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Commonwealth v. BonomoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1959-05-28· cited 168×
- Commonwealth v. FromalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-03-22· cited 68×
- Commonwealth v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1958-05-02· cited 41×
- Commonwealth v. StattiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1950-05-20· cited 36×
- Commonwealth v. BrysonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1923-03-12· cited 36×
- Commonwealth v. HolgateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1916-05-09· cited 25×
- Commonwealth v. WeinbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1923-01-29· cited 21×
- Commonwealth v. DePalmaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1920-06-26· cited 20×
- State v. GrissomNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1930-12-13· cited 13×
- Commonwealth v. GoodmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1956-10-25· cited 10×
- Commonwealth v. StonerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1918-10-12· cited 10×
- Commonwealth v. CorbinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1968-11-12· cited 9×
- Commonwealth v. BerneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1917-04-30· cited 8×
- Commonwealth v. DisalvoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1922-06-24· cited 7×
- Commonwealth v. DennerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1917-10-19· cited 5×
- Commonwealth v. HoskinsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1915-07-21· cited 5×
- Commonwealth v. BoberSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1915-04-19· cited 4×
- United States v. PanchellaE.D. Pennsylvania· 1941-10-29· cited 1×
- State v. StalterNew Mexico Court of Appeals· 2023-03-21
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.