From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Knox

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jun 26, 1953
374 Pa. 343 (Pa. 1953)

Opinion

May 25, 1953.

June 26, 1953.

Argued May 25, 1953. Before STERN, C. J., STEARNE, JONES, BELL, CHIDSEY and MUSMANNO, JJ.

Appeal, No. 208, Jan. T., 1953, from judgment of Superior Court, Oct. T., 1952, No. 118, affirming judgment and sentence of Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia County, Dec. Sessions, 1950, No. 1010, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Ralph F. Knox. Judgment affirmed; reargument refused July 16, 1953.

Same case in Superior Court: 172 Pa. Super. 510.

Indictment charging defendant with (1) violations of Magistrates' Court Act, (2) malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance, and (3) misconduct in office, and other indictments. Before ALESSANDRONI, J.

Verdicts of guilty on indictments; defendant sentenced on first indictment and sentences suspended on other indictments. Defendant appealed to the Superior Court which affirmed the judgment and sentence of the court below. Appeal by defendant to Supreme Court allowed.

Harry R. Back, with him Back Levy, for appellant.

Malcolm W. Berkowitz, Assistant District Attorney, with him Samuel Dash, Assistant District Attorney, Michael von Moschzisker, First Assistant District Attorney and Richardson Dilworth, District Attorney, for appellee.


After careful consideration of the record and merits of this case, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed on the opinion of Judge RENO, 172 Pa. Super. 510, 94 A.2d 128.

Mr. Justice MUSMANNO dissents.


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Knox

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jun 26, 1953
374 Pa. 343 (Pa. 1953)
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Knox

Case Details

Full title:Commonwealth v. Knox, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Jun 26, 1953

Citations

374 Pa. 343 (Pa. 1953)
97 A.2d 782

Citing Cases

Re: S. M. Greenberg, J., C. C. P. of Phila

Constitution, Article VI, Section 7. The Constitution of 1838 contained a similar provision. This provision…

Kennewick v. Day

Where the mens rea is not involved in a crime defined under the police power, i.e., where the sole question…