Commonwealth v. Reed

Citations

• 65 Pa. Super. 91
• 1916 Pa. Super. LEXIS 25

Syllabus

<p>- Criminal law — Nolle prosequi — Action of court against protest of district attorney — Act of Maxell 12, 1866, P. L. 85.</p> <p>The Court of Oyer and Terminer is without jurisdiction to enter a nolle prosequi in a prosecution for robbery, notwithstanding the protest of the district attorney, where the record shows that the application of the prosecutor through private counsel for such action of the court, was not in writing, and was not verified by affidavit, as provided by the Act of March 12, 1866, P. L. 85.</p> <p>There is nothing in the Acts of March 29, 1819, P. L. 266, and March 31, 1860, P. L. 437, and the decisions of the courts in construing these acts, to indicate an intention to depart from the doctrine of the common law that a nolle prosequi can only be entered by the prosecuting ofiacer, or with his consent.</p>