Commonwealth v. Channing

Citations

• 55 Pa. Super. 510
• 1914 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Special verdict — Conclusion from facts — Extortion.</p> <p>1. A jury may render a special verdict in a criminal case, wherein the facts are found and the legal inference of guilt or innocence is referred to the court; but where this unusual mode of procedure is adopted a conviction cannot be sustained unless the guilt of the defendant of the specific offense charged in the indictment is the inevitable legal conclusion from the facts stated in the special verdict.</p> <p>Criminal law — Extortion—Special verdict — Coal and iron policeman.</p> <p>2. A person indicted for extortion cannot be convicted of such an offense on a special verdict which states that the defendant was commissioned by the governor as a coal and iron policeman, that he duly qualified as such, and received a compensation of a stated sum by agreement from a coal company; that he was authorized to exercise within the county for which he was commissioned all the powers of policeman of the city of Philadelphia under Acts of February 27,1865, P. L. 225, and April 11, 1866, P. L. 99; and that during the term for which he was commissioned and was being compensated as stated, he received from the county in two criminal cases, fees and mileage which were taxed in his favor for serving subpoenas for the commonwealth and executing commitments issued by a justice of the peace.</p> <p>3. Such a special verdict is insufficient to sustain a conviction because it does not state the facts from which a legal conclusion must necessarily be drawn, not only that the defendant was prohibited by statute or rule of public policy from taking the fees, but also that he tpok them by color of his office.</p>