Commonwealth v. Brown

Citations

• 28 Pa. Super. 296
• 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 186

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Pleading—Autrefois acquit.</p> <p>The true test to ascertain whether the plea of autrefois acquit be a good bar is, whether the evidence necessary to support the second indictment would have been sufficient to secure a legal conviction on the first. The burden of proving the prior acquittal is' on the defendant, and must be supported by the preponderance of evidence. Where the facts are not controverted, the court has authority to direct a verdict for or against the commonwealth as the case may require.</p> <p>On the trial of an indictment for forging a promissory note the défendant entered a plea of autrefois acquit. On the trial the defendant offered under the plea, the record of a former acquittal on the charge of forging a note of a different date and amount from that described in the indictment on which she was. being tried. In the course of the first trial the defendant admitted that she signed the note, but alleged that she was authorized to do so, and that she had signed the name of the alleged maker to numerous other notes with the latter’s authority including the note referred to in the second indictment. Held, that it was proper for the court to instruct the jury that the evidence did not support the plea, and that the verdict must be in favor of the commonwealth.</p>