Hanney v. Commonwealth

Citations

• 116 Pa. 322
• 9 A. 339
• 1887 Pa. LEXIS 395

Syllabus

<p>1. In criminal prosecutions, evidence' as to the good character of the defendant is to be regarded as evidence of a substantive fact, like any other fact tending to establish the defendant’s innocence, and it ought to be so regarded both by court and jury: Heine v. Commonwealth, 91 Penn. St. 146, followed.</p> <p>2. On the trial of a criminal cause, witnesses testified to the good character of the defendant. The court charged inter alia: “If you believe that the testimony in this case clearly points out the guilt of John Hanney, then Ms previous good character should have no weight in determining the question of his guilt or innocence. If, however, you think that the commonwealth have made out but a weak case, that whilst possibly it might be sufficient for conviction, still the case is a weak one, there the testimony as to his good character ought to weigh with you, with • strength sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in Ms favor, which reasonable doubt would enure to Ms acquittal.”</p> <p>Held, to be error.</p>