Commonwealth v. Dibella

Citations

• 72 Pa. Super. 360
• 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 314

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Conspiracy—Declarations of conspirators — Admissibility.</p> <p>While the declarations of one of several conspirators are evidence against the others, they are so only after the fact of conspiracy has been proved and during the time it continues. If made after the conspiracy has been dissolved, they are not evidence.</p> <p>Where the offense charged was a joint one and the defendants were indicted together, the Commonwealth was entitled to prove the declaration of one of the conspirators, only as evidence against the one making it. It should have been offered for this limited purpose- only, and it was incumbent on the trial judge, to explain clearly to the jury that it could be considered by them, solely for the purpose of determining the guilt or innocence of that particular defendant.</p> <p>Criminal procedure — Indictment for conspiracy — Declarations of one conspirator — Admissibility against party making declarations.</p> <p>Where the declarations of one conspirator are wrongfully admitted for the purpose of establishing the guilt of all the parties to the conspiracy, the defendant making the declarations has no cause for complaint because of the admission of such evidence. His own declarations in the nature of admission of guilt would always be competent evidence against him, and he is in no position to reap any advantage from the fact that the trial court made a mistake, in the admission of evidence against his eodefendants, which is not competent to affect them.</p>