Commonwealth v. George
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Commonwealth v. George, 13 Pa. Super. 542 (1900)
1900 Pa. Super. LEXIS 196
Beaver, Bell, Bice, Orlady, Porter
Commonwealth v. George
Opinion of the Court
The first assignment of error cannot be sustained. The court is not bound to entertain a motion to direct a verdict of acquittal until the conclusion of all the testimony. The second assignment raises the question as to the sufficiency of the testimony to warrant a conviction. After a careful consideration of the evidence we are not convinced that the court committed error in submitting the question to the jury.
The judgment is affirmed and the record is remitted to the court below .to the end that the sentence be fully carried into -effect.
Reference
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Charge of court — Binding instructions — Conclusion of testimony. The court is not bound to direct a verdict of acquittal until the conclusion of all the testimony. Charge of court — Binding instructions — Appeal. Where the sufficiency of the testimony to warrant a conviction is challenged the appellate court will not reverse when not convinced of error committed in submitting the question to the jury.