Commonwealth v. Motsko

Citations

• 70 Pa. Super. 209
• 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 212

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Evidence—Reputation—Charge.</p> <p>On the trial of a criminal prosecution the chief of police testified that he was acquainted with the defendant’s reputation before the occurrence of the felony charged against him. No objection was made to the form of the question and none appeared to the competency of the witness. He lived in the community and stated that he had knowledge of the reputation of the defendant with respect to the matter involved. It appeared on his cross-examination that he ascertained certain facts with reference to prior conduct of the defendant after the occurrence of the assault for which he was tried, but after the examination on that subject had been concluded by the counsel for the defendant the- question as to the reputation of the accused before the occurrence of the assault for which he was then on trial was propounded, and with reference to that reputation he testified. Held, that the witness was competent to testify as to the defendant’s reputation.</p> <p>In such a case it is not error for the court, to charge as to the testimony of the chief of police. “He made an investigation of things occurring before this last offence with which he now stands charged and discovered that he was not a man of good character.”</p>