Commonwealth v. Tillia

Citations

• 73 Pa. Super. 376
• 1920 Pa. Super. LEXIS 23

Syllabus

<p>Criminal law — Forcible entry and detainer — Possession—Title —Evidence.</p> <p>In the trial of an indictment for forcible entry and detainer the title to the premises is not involved. It is requisite that the person claiming possession should be in actual and peaceable possession, and where this occupancy has continued for a considerable length of time, it is ordinarily a fact susceptible of easy proof. It is this possession which the law protects against acts of violence.</p> <p>Where a prosecutor and his family were quietly possessed of the premises and the defendant with violence and a strong hand broke and entered the premises, or with threats or such show of strength as was calculated to intimidate the occupants of the house, and forcibly took possession thereof, a verdict of guilty will he sustained.</p> <p>Evidence — Constructive delivery — Charge of court — Reversible error.</p> <p>The mere delivery of a key to the rear door of a house, during the course of negotiations for the exchange of real estate, is not such a constructive delivery as would give the legal title to the property against the party having actual possession. Under such circumstances, it was error for the court to instruct the jury that such delivery of the key was a delivery of possession and that the defendant was justified in entering by force, and a verdict of not guilty will be reversed.</p>