Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. House

Citations

  • 6 Pa. Super. 92
  • 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 318

Syllabus

<p>Practice — Criminal law — Additional instructions in absence of defendant —Adjournment.</p> <p>It is reversible error where the trial judge, after adjournment of court, permits the jury to come in for additional instructions which he gives in the absence of defendant and his counsel and without notice to either. A person under trial for a crime has the right to be present during the entire trial; he has a right to assume that .no further instructions will be given during the adjournment of court. No waiver or consent can be implied from his absence under such circumstances.</p> <p>While the court has the discretionary power to recall the jury for further instructions or to withdraw or to correct erroneous instructions such instructions should be given in open court.</p> <p>Evidence — Criminal law — Proof of independent crime, when admissible.</p> <p>Generally evidence of the defendant’s commission of another distinct and independent crime cannot be received for the purpose of proving his commission of the offense for which he is being tried; yet under some circumstances such evidence may be given : To establish identity; to show that the act charged was intentional and wilful, not accidental; to prove motive; to show guilty knowledge and purpose, etc.</p> <p>Evidence — Criminal law — Pertinent cross-examination.</p> <p>Evidence being given by defendant, charged with embezzlement of public funds, that his alleged false representations made to the officers of the city were innocently, if mistakenly made, it was competent for the commonwealth to cross-examine him on this subject and admissions, made by him, that he was receiving interest on the money in question from banks of deposit, are relevant testimony as tending to rebut the theory of mistake set up in his direct examination, and as tending to show a personal interest to be served in making the false and misleading statements and in withholding the money.</p> <p>Evidence — Criminal law — Scope of cross-examina

Judges: Beaver, Ham, Orlady, Porter, Reeder, Rice, Smith, Wick

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

31 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Commonwealth v. House

9 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.