Commonwealth v. Manchas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an appellant was not entitled to exclusion of testimony without demonstrating prejudice
• holding that a lack of evidence of motive “does not constitute a fatal flaw in a third-degree murder conviction,” as motive is not an essential element of the crime and is not necessary to warrant a conviction
• [holding] that the [fact that the] fact[-]finder “apparently disbelieved [d]efendant’s versions of events and believed all of one Commonwealth’s witness’s testimony … is not shocking to the Court’s sense of justice”
• it is within the province of the jury to reconcile inconsistent testimony and to believe all, part or none of the evidence
• it is the exclusive role of the jury to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts in the testimony
• it is the exclusive role of the jury to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve any conflicts in the testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).