Commonwealth v. Wilson
Citations
- 186 Pa. 1
- 40 A. 283
- 1898 Pa. LEXIS 954
Syllabus
<p>Criminal law — Murder—Conspiracy—Evidence.</p> <p>On the trial o£ an indictment for murder where the commonwealth offered to show that the prisoner conspired with other persons to rob the deceased some months before the murder occurred, but the evidence in support of the offer shows only that the prisoner probably overheard a conversation among the other persons without assenting thereto or taking any part therein, the evidence should be rejected.</p> <p>It is substantial error for a judge in charging a jury on the trial of an indictment for murder to give the commonwealth the full benefit of an offer of evidence, rather than the fair effect of what was actually proved under the offer.</p> <p>Criminal law — Murder —■ Confessions — Admissions — Evidence — Detectives.</p> <p>A confession voluntarily made is entitled ordinarily to great weight. If it is forced from the mind by the flattery of hope or the torture of fear induced by representations made to the accused, its value is lost, and it should be excluded altogether. If it is induced by what may be called collateral inducements it occupies a kind of intermediate position. Such inducements are to be considered as affecting, not the admissibility of the statements made by the prisoner against himself, but their credibility. They should go to the jury with the inducements that led to them, in order that the jury may see how they came to be made, and the motives that operated on the prisoner’s mind when they were made. The jury can then judge of their value and determine the weight to which they are entitled.</p> <p>, On the trial of an indictment for murder it appeared that professional detectives, having fixed their suspicions on the prisoner, approached him and led him to believe that they were the members of a baud of outlaws engaged in the commission of great crimes, and that he could secure admission to the band if his record as a criminal was such as to give assurance of his courage and hardihood. Under thi
Judges: Fell, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Commonwealth v. CarluccettiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1952-01-07· cited 62×
- Commonwealth v. DanforthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1990-06-14· cited 44×
- Commonwealth v. RaccoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1909-05-24· cited 44×
- State v. OutenSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1961-01-11· cited 27×
- Commonwealth v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1953-01-05· cited 27×
- Commonwealth v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1924-04-28· cited 22×
- Stagemeyer v. StateNebraska Supreme Court· 1937-06-18· cited 21×
- Merritt v. PoliSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1912-04-29· cited 12×
- State v. GambleSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1966-02-10· cited 10×
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1962-01-16· cited 10×
- Commonwealth v. SpeiserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1922-07-13· cited 10×
- Commonwealth v. CaperoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1908-02-28· cited 6×
- Commonwealth v. GraySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1921-07-14· cited 1×
- Commonwealth v. WeiselFayette County Court of Oyer and Terminer· 1927-01-19
- Commonwealth v. JohnsFranklin County Court of Oyer and Terminer· 1947-05-23
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.