Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1968

Commonwealth v. Frankhouser

Commonwealth v. Frankhouser
Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Decided December 6, 1968 · Hannum, Hoffman, Jacobs, Montgomery, Spaulding, Watkins, Wright
213 Pa. Super. 462; 249 A.2d 356; 1968 Pa. Super. LEXIS 792

Commonwealth v. Frankhouser

Dissenting Opinion

*463Dissenting Opinion by

Montgomery, J.:

I respectfully dissent from the action of the majority in affirming the grant of a new trial in this case as a result of a post-conviction petition.

Discovery of the reputation of the minor subsequent to petitioner’s conviction on the charge of statutory rape does not meet the definition of after-discovered evidence as to justify a new trial. The other reasons stated in the petition are equally without merit.

Wright, P. J., and Watkins, J., join in this dissent.

Opinion of the Court

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Order affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.