Commonwealth v. Romezzo

Citations

• 235 Pa. 407
• 84 A. 400
• 1912 Pa. LEXIS 560

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Murder—Degree—Province of court and jury.</p> <p>1. On the trial of an indictment for murder, the question of the degree of murder goes to the jury with the question of guilt, and a peremptory instruction which withdraws it is erroneous; but it is always within the province of the court to point out the duty of the jury under the law and the evidence if they are left free to act.</p> <p>2. Where it appears that the killing was committed for the purpose of robbery the court commits no error in telling the jury that if this was so it was murder in the first degree, and that it was their duty to so find, if he further says “I do not intend, by saying this to take away from you or to interfere with the right which you have under the law to fix the degree.”</p> <p>Criminal law — Murder—Reasonable doubt — Charge.</p> <p>3. On the trial of an indictment for murder, two points on the subject of reasonable doubt were presented, in one of which the court was asked to say that if there was a reasonable doubt as to any material circumstance sought to be proved by the commonwealth as a link in the chain of proof, the verdict should be not guilty, and in the other that unless each fact proved by the commonwealth was consistent with the prisoner’s guilt, etc., there should be acquittal. In affirming the points the court called 'attention to the words, “material circumstance” used in the first and in answering the second said that the fact must be a material fact that was a necessary link in the chain which made out the commonwealth’s case. ILeld, that these instructions as to reasonable doubt were without error.</p>