Commonwealth v. Gray

Citations

• 72 Pa. Super. 279
• 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 303

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Larceny—Witnesses—Evidence of alleged common-law wife — Admissibility.</p> <p>Cohabitation and reputation are not marriage, but are merely circumstances from which marriage can be proved. The presumption being in favor of the competency of a witness, the burden is on the defendant to show otherwise, and evidence of cohabitation and reputation alone, Is not sufficient to establish a relation, which would render the woman’s testimony inadmissible, as the common-law wife of the defendant.</p> <p>Where there was no evidence of either marriage in fact, or a lawful relation between the parties at the beginning of their association together, there is no support for the theory of common law marriage, and the consequent incapacity of the witness to testify.</p> <p>Criminal law — Larceny—Instructions to jury — Harmless error.</p> <p>An erroneous instruction as to the right of the jury to convict a defendant as an accessory after the fact, is not reversible error, where the defendant was indicted for larceny, and tried as a principal, and all the evidence against him related to that charge.</p> <p>Where no special instructions were requested, unless it is clear that an omission to charge the jury on a relevant point of law did in fact work material harm to the defendant, the verdict will not be reversed on appeal.</p>