Commonwealth v. Yachymiak

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “inconsistent verdicts may be rendered by a jury and that such verdicts are not grounds for a new trial or for reversal” and that the “same rule applies in nonjury trials”
• holding that an acquittal “cannot be interpreted as a specific finding in relation to some of the evidence,” and inconsistent verdicts in a simultaneous jury and bench trial are not grounds for a new trial or reversal
• explaining that jury acquittals may not be interpreted as specific factual findings with regard to the evidence, as an acquittal may be nothing more than the jury’s decision to show lenity
• affirming judgment of sentence following trial court verdict that was inconsistent with a jury trial verdict in a consolidated jury/bench trial
• “[A]n acquittal cannot be interpreted as a specific finding in relation to some of the evidence. The acquittal may be no more than the jury’s assumption of a power which they had no right to exercise, but to which they were disposed through lenity.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).