Commonwealth v. Radzinowicz

Citations

• 39 Pa. Super. 173
• 1909 Pa. Super. LEXIS 459

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Assault and battery — Felonious assault — Cutting and wounding — Indictment—Charge.</p> <p>1. An indictment contained three counts, one charging felonious assault and battery, a second, cutting, stabbing and wounding, and a third, assault and battery. At the trial the defendant denied that he used a knife, and claimed that a cut in the arm of the prosecutor had been made by the breaking of a beer glass. His testimony was not in any way corroborated, and he would not say whether the glass which he said that he held had been broken. No other witness saw a glass in his hand. The court instructed the jury that they should disregard the first count “leaving the other two counts, namely, aggravated assault and battery and simple assault and battery.” The court also charged “the theory has been suggested, but it is proper that I should state to you that I am unable to discover from the testimony in this case, any substantial support of that theory, that this wound was inflicted by a glass. You have seen the wound and you can draw your own conclusions from the appearance of it, whether it was inflicted with a knife, or with a glass. ... Of course it is for you to say.” Held (1), that the jury must have understood the words “aggravated assault and battery,” as meaning the offense charged in the second count, and that therefore their use could not have harmed the prisoner, and (2) that the court’s expression of opinion on the evidence was not improper.</p> <p>Criminal law — Assault and battery — Settlement of case by licensed saloon keeper.</p> <p>2. A settlement with a prosecutor by a licensed saloon keeper in whose saloon the assault occurred is not a valid settlement authorized by the Act of March 31, 1860, sec. 9, P. L. 4 7.</p>