Commonwealth v. Miller

Citations

• 78 Pa. Super. 234
• 1922 Pa. Super. LEXIS 92

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Statutory rape — Age—Evidence—Sufficiency—> Charge of the court — Expression of opinion.</p> <p>In the trial of an indictment for statutory rape, where all the evidence in the case as to the age of the prosecutrix is to the effect that she was about thirteen years of age at the time of the alleged offense, it was not error for the trial judge in his charge to express a decided opinion upon the fact of the girl’s age.</p> <p>The burden is upon the Commonwealth to prove all the elements of the crime, but, when evidence is produced clearly establishing any fact, and the defendant, in presenting his ease, concedes or does not controvert that fact, it is not improper for the judge to say that, in his opinion, the fact is established, so long as he leaves the question of the existence of the fact to the jury.</p> <p>Criminal law — New trial — After-discovered evidence — Discretion of trial court.</p> <p>The granting or refusal of a new trial, on the ground of after-discovered evidence, is a matter involving the exercise of discretion by the trial court. Where an affidavit is offered by the defendant, as evidence of reason for a new trial, but the defendant took no depositions of the affiant, and the Commonwealth had no opportunity to cross-examine him under oath, the affidavit is an object of suspicion, and the Superior Court will not say, upon appeal, that the trial court was in error in refusing to allow a new trial.</p>