Skip to main content
· 7/26/1900

Commonwealth v. Kay

Citations

  • 14 Pa. Super. 376
  • 1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 57

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Pleading—Indictment—Rejection of surplusage.</p> <p>Where a count in an indictment does not charge a statutory offense yet, but for words “ contrary to the form of the act of general assembly in such case made and provided,” was a well drawn count for a common-law offense, those words properly may be rejected as surplusage.</p> <p>Criminal law — Right to stand aside jurors.</p> <p>The right to stand aside jurors exists at the present time in misdemeanors as well as in felonies; and this right iueludes the right to reserve the acceptance or the challenge (either peremptory or for cause) of the juror until the whole panel is gone through.</p> <p>The right exists independently of the mode in which jurors in the particular kind of case to be tried are impaneled and the mode need not necessarily be changed in order that the right may be exercised.</p> <p>Evidence — Cross-examination—Appeal.</p> <p>It is not sufficient to show that an improper question, either in form or substance, has been put to a witness. It must appear that an answer was received which tended to injure the case of the appellant.</p> <p>Evidence — Previous confirmatory statement — When not admissible.</p> <p>The subject of the admissibility in evidence of the previous statement of a witness consonant with his testimony is not free from difficulty. Such evidence cannot, as a general rule, be given in chief. It cannot broadly be said to be admissible whenever a witness had been contradicted. Nor is it admissible when it is not alleged that the witness made inconsistent or contradictory statements and where no attempt was made to impeach his general character for truth, and no evidence, direct or circumstantial, was given tending to show that his statements were fabrications of recent date, or that, by reason of his relation to any of the parties or the cause, which relation did not exist when his prior statements were made, he was unconsciously influenced.</p> <p>To admit evidence that

Judges: Beaver, Orlady, Porter, Rice, Taylor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.