Commonwealth v. Gormley

Citations

• 77 Pa. Super. 298
• 1921 Pa. Super. LEXIS 256

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Fraudulent election returns — Conspiracy to make —Intention—Evidence—Admissibility.</p> <p>To make an agreement between two or more persons to do an act innocent in itself a criminal conspiracy, it is not enough that it appears that the act which was the object of the agreement was prohibited. The confederation must be corrupt. The agreement must have been entered into with an evil purpose, as distinguished from the purpose simply to do the act prohibited, in ignorance of the prohibition.</p> <p>The criminal quality resides in the intention of the parties to the agreement, construed in connection with the purpose contemplated. The mere fact that the conspiracy has for its object the doing of an act which may be unlawful, followed by the doing of such act, does not constitute the crime of conspiracy, unless the jury find that the parties were actuated by a criminal intent.</p> <p>On the trial of an indictment for conspiracy to make false election returns, and making such false returns, in violation of the 4th section of the Act of July 9,1919, P. L. 839, an offer was made to prove by a witness, one of the defendants, that, although false returns were made, no intention existed to commit a crime. The court excluded the testimony on the ground that the defendant, having violated the plain provisions of the statute, could not be allowed to give his reasons why he did so.</p> <p>Held: Reversing the lower court, that on a charge of conspiracy to make false returns the testimony should not have been excluded, but that the defendant should have been allowed to explain the reasons for his action.</p> <p>Whenever the belief or intent is material the defendant may testify as to what it was. And it was open to the jury to find, from the evidence, that no criminal intention existed.</p>