Commonwealth v. Wickett

Citations

• 20 Pa. Super. 350
• 1902 Pa. Super. LEXIS 236

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Witness—Contradiction of party's witness.</p> <p>The rule that a party calling a witness is not permitted to ask leading questions and is bound by his testimony, is liberally construed in modern practice, and while it is still the general rule that it is not competent fora party to prove that a witness whom he has called and whose testimony is unfavorable to his cause had previously stated the facts in a different manner, yet exceptions to this general rule must be permitted to prevent a failure of justice.</p> <p>When a party has been misled as to what a witness will testify by a preliminary examination, he may lay the ground for contradicting the witness by a cross-examination, and subsequently contradict him by other witnesses.</p> <p>On a criminal prosecution for forgery of a promissory note the person whose name was signed to the note was called by the commonwealth and testified that he had signed it. He admitted, however, that when first asked regarding the note, he asserted that the signature was not his, and that he had not given the note, but upon cross-examination claimed that he had subsequently notified the prosecutor by telegram and by letter, that he was mistaken in his first declaration denying the execution of the note. Held, that the commonwealth was entitled to contradict the witness by proof of his statements made to the commonwealth’s attorney on the eve of the trial, to the effect that he had not signed the note.</p> <p>Criminal law — Arrest of judgment — Evidence—Practice.</p> <p>A motion in arrest of judgment is not the proper mode to raise a question as to the sufficiency of the evidence.</p>