Commonwealth v. Delfino

Citations

• 259 Pa. 272
• 102 A. 949
• 1918 Pa. LEXIS 405

Syllabus

<p>Murder — First- degree — Lying in wait — Evidence—Adverse witness — Gross-examination — Evidence of witness’s previous statement — Threats—III feeling — Remoteness—Admissibility — Motive —Scope of cross-examination of defendant — Improper remarks of district attorney — Failure to object — Dying declcvraiion — Conflicting declarations — Defenses — Alibi — New trial — After-discovered evidence — Cumulative evidence.</p> <p>1. Where on the trial of a homicide ease one of the Commonwealth’s witnesses testifies.at variance to his previous statement, it is not error to permit the district attorney to cross-examine the witness as to such statement, or to offer testimony as to what his previous statement was, for the purpose of neutralizing the effect of his testimony. The allowance of such permission is largely discretionary with the trial judge.</p> <p>2. The remoteness of threats may greatly impair their probative force, but as a rule it does not affect their admissibility.</p> <p>8. On the trial of an indictment for murder it is competent for the Commonwealth to show that the defendant had formerly boarded with deceased and during such time there had been trouble between them because of which the deceased had ordered the defendant from his home, although such occurrence was two and a half years previous to the homicide. The remoteness goes to the weight rather than the competency of such evidence.</p> <p>4. Great latitude is permissible in the cross-examination of a defendant.</p> <p>5; Where a defendant on trial for murder testifies that he had ho motive or reason for killing the deceased, the district attorney may ask him questions tending to prove motive, and in that connection to attempt to show that defendant blamed deceased for a wound inflicted upon defendant by a third party, and defendant cannot complain because such examination failed in its purpose, where it does not appear that the district attorney asked the questions in bad faith or that defendant was p