Com. v. Richardson

Decision Date02 May 1958
Citation392 Pa. 528,140 A.2d 828
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Jerold RICHARDSON, Appellant.
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court

Fronefield Crawford, Crawford & Frazier, Wayne, for appellant.

Raymond R. Start, Dist. Atty., J. Harold Hughes, First Asst. Dist. Atty., Ernest L. Green, Asst. Dist. Atty., Media, for appellee.

Before CHARLES ALVIN JONES, C. J., and BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO, BENJAMIN R. JONES and COHEN, JJ.

BELL, Justice.

The defendant, Jerold Richardson, was convicted by a jury of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. In this appeal he seeks a new trial because of alleged trial errors.

Defendant, together with James Ryder and James Graham, was indicted for the murder of Roy Wunder, who was found dead at about 12:50 a. m. on Monday, September 20, 1954, in a taproom operated by him known as 'Stony Creek Tavern' which is located on the Baltimore Pike, Springfield, Delaware County, Pa. Defendant was 17 years of age at the time of the crime. All three of the individuals involved applied for and were granted separate trials.

Defendant, through his Court-appointed attorney, applied prior to trial, and during the trial for a change of venue; these applications were refused. Defendant, prior to trial and during the course of the examination of jurors on voir dire, applied for a continuance; these applications were refused.

Roy Wunder, the deceased, went to the Stony Creek Tavern sometime on Sunday evening, September 19, 1954. At approximately 12:50 a. m., on Monday morning, September 20th, Maurice Gouse was operating his automobile in an eastwardly direction towards Philadelphia and as he passed the Stony Creek Tavern his attention was directed to the breaking of glass. He looked at the Tavern building and saw two men, whom he described as teenagers because of their dress and build, come through the window. He then noticed these same two individuals run to an automobile which was parked on an intersecting street near the Tavern. Gouse saw the lights of the automobile go on and the automobile start up, turn onto the Baltimore Pike, and then proceed in a westwardly direction towards Media, Pa. Gouse attempted to follow the get-away car in his own automobile, but was out-distanced. He then reported the incident to police officers who accompanied him to the Stony Creek Tavern and after gaining entrance, discovered the body of Roy Wunder.

Wunder's body was lying in the back of the barroom; there were bar stools overturned, a vase on the floor, and part of a top of a stool and broken water glasses on the floor. Gouse found a bullet on the cocktail lounge seat near the front of the barroom. This was proved to be the fatal bullet and was identified as a .38 S. & W. caliber. The gun used in the killing has never been found. Gouse gave the police a description of the automobile he pursued although he was not certain of some of its characteristics. The automobile as described by Gouse has never been located. It was later discovered that entrance to the taproom was gained through a skylight that led into the men's washroom.

Defendant was in the custody of the Philadelphia Police Department from December 14, 1954, until December 28, 1954, at which time he escaped from custody. He was rearrested on January 3, 1955. Sergeant McCrory and other officers questioned Richardson the same morning about some 60 or more burglaries in Philadelphia. At that time McCrory had no knowledge of the Stony Creek Tavern killing.

McCrory testified that defendant told him on January 3 that he and James Ryder and James Graham had driven to the Stony Creek Tavern and that Graham and Ryder entered the Tavern to rob it while he, Richardson, remained in the automobile. McCrory notified his superior who in turn notified the Delaware County authorities. That afternoon defendant admitted to Sergeant McCrory in detail his participation in the robbery. However, when he was informed that a murder had taken place at the Tavern, he denied any participation in the robbery. On January 4th, at about 11:45 p. m., after being questioned about the murder of Wunder, he signed a confession admitting his participation in the robbery during which Wunder was murdered.

Defendant's confession was read to him by the District Attorney of Delaware County, Raymond R. Start, in the presence of six other persons who signed defendant's confession as witnesses. In addition three other police officers and the Official Court Stenographer were present, although they did not sign as witnesses. Seven of those who were present when the defendant's confession was read to him and when he executed it testified at the trial; five of the seven, including the District Attorney, Mr. Start, testified unequivocally that defendant voluntarily made and signed the confession and was no coerced, threatened or given any promises. The other two witnesses were not asked this question.

The relevant and material portions of defendant's confession (in question and answer form) are as follows:

'Q. Do you know why you have been arrested? A. Yes.

'Q. Why? A. Homicide.

'Q. Do you want to make a voluntary statement? A. Yes.

'Q. It is my duty to warn you that anything you say or sign can be used against you at the time of your trial in court. Do you understand that? A. Yes.

'Q. In making this statement, do you make it of your own free will, without fear, force, threats or promises? A. Yes.

'Q. Jerold, will you go on in your own words and tell us what you know concerning the shooting and murder of Roy E. Wunder, 46 years, white, proprietor of the Stony Creek Tavern, 334 Baltimore Avenue, Springfield Township, Delaware County, Pa. which occurred on Monday morning, September 30, 1954, at about 12:45 or 12:50 a. m. A. I met James Ryder about 12:00 p. m. Sunday afternoon, September 19, at 7th and Susquehanna Avenue. We got a trolley car and went down to 68th and Elmwood Avenue and went into a luncheonette known as 'Tony's'. We met Jim Graham. He told us about a gun store out on the Baltimore Pike which we could burglarise. We stayed around there until 3:00 o'clock and then went into the center of town in Philadelphia in Jim's car, Jim Graham driving. It was a 1950 Nash station wagon dark, I don't know what color. We went to 13th and Market in town and hung around the Arcadia until about dusk and then went out on the Baltimore Pike and I was driving at the time and Jim Graham directed. As we were passing the tavern, Jim stated that he knew of it being robbed before or that he himself robbed it. He said that we would find a small cabinet safe inside; that he and Ryder would go in while I stayed slouched in the car. They left the car and that was the last I seen of them until I heard a sound

'(Signed) Jerold E. Richardson

(In ink)

Statement of:

Jerold Edward Richardson

'A. continued)

that I cannot identify; a few minutes later the breaking of glass. Then they came running around the corner of the building and jumped in the car. I shot out, down past the light, made a right and made another right a couple blocks down, that's the last I remember, Jim was directing. I am not familiar with the neighborhood until we finally got back to Tony's. When me and Ryder emerged from the car, Jim keeping the gun in the car. Me and Ryder then got a cab and dropped him off at 7th and York and proceeded home myself.

'Q. Is everything you have told us in this statement the truth? A. yes.

'Q. Can you read and write the English language? A. Yes.

'Q. How high did you go in school? A. Twelfth grade.'

* * *

* * *

'Q. Did Ryder and Graham have a gun? A. They both had guns.

'Q. Did you know what kind of guns they were? A. Two revolvers.

'Q. Do you know what caliber? A. I believe one was a .38, might have both been .38's, I am not sure.

'Q. Where did you first see these revolvers? A. Outside Tony's

'Q. Did they have them in the car? A. Yes.

'Q. Did you see them? A. Yes.

'Q. And they took these guns to the tavern? A. I assumed they did.

'Q. What else did they take, if anything? A. Some talk of mentioning about a bar to get into the place.

* * *

* * *

'Q. What were your duties on this job besides driving the car? A. I was to be the lookout.

(Signed) Jerold E. Richardson

(In ink)

Statement of:

Jerold Edward Richardson

'Q. Now after Ryder and Graham went into this taproom, what was the next thing that occurred? A. I heard some noise I couldn't identify, not too loud, but a noise. Several minutes later I heard a glass break.

'Q. When was the first time you saw either of these boys after you heard the glass break? A. About thirty seconds later I seen them come around the corner.

'Q. What, if anything, did they say when they arrived at the car? A. Graham said, 'You're crazy.'

'Q. Graham said, 'You're crazy' to whom? A. To Ryder.

'Q. Anything else? A. I asked what happened and Graham said, 'Ask him.'

'Q. Meaning Ryder? A. Yes.

'Q. Did you ask Ryder what happened? A. Ryder told me to 'Get the hell out of here.'

'Q. What did you do when Ryder told you to 'get the hell out'? A. Made a right on Baltimore Pike going west.

* * *

* * *

'Q. And returning from the taproom by way of the route you described to Tony's place was there anything said about the guns? A. They said they had better get rid of them, Jim said that, he will take care of them.

'Q. What Jim do you mean? A. Graham.

'Q. Let me understand this. James Ryder said something about the guns and Jim Graham said he would take care of them. A. He said, 'Keep cool,' 'I will take care of them.'

'Q. Did he say what he was going to do with them? A. No.

* * *

* * *

'Q. Who described to you what occurred inside the taproom the morning Roy Wunder was killed? A. Ryder.

'Q. When did he describe this to you? A. In a cab.

'Q. Was that on your way to 7th and York? A. Yes.

'What did he say? A. He told me Graham fired the shot. He said a man threw a chair at him and Graham went to duck and as he ducked both guns...

To continue reading

Request your trial
37 cases
  • Com. v. Scoleri
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • April 4, 1960
    ...v. Jordan, 328 Pa. 439, 446, 196 A. 10; Commonwealth v. Blanchard, 345 Pa. 289, 291, 26 A.2d 303, 27 A.2d 48; Commonwealth v. Richardson, 392 Pa. 528, 544, 140 A.2d 828; Commonwealth v. Gates, 392 Pa. 557, 564, 141 A.2d 219; Sadler, Criminal Procedure in Pennsylvania (2nd ed.), Vol. 2, 580.......
  • Commonwealth v. Martin
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 26, 1975
    ...grant or refusal of a change of venue or of a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial Court.' Commonwealth v. Richardson, 392 Pa. 528, 540, 140 A.2d 828, 835 (1958). See also Commonwealth v. Powell, Pa., 328 A.2d 507 (1974); Commonwealth v. Martinolich, 456 Pa. 136, 318 A.2d......
  • Com. v. Martin
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 26, 1975
    ...grant or refusal of a change of venue or of a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial Court.' Commonwealth v. Richardson, 392 Pa. 528, 540, 140 A.2d 828, 835 (1958). See also Commonwealth v. Powell, Pa., 328 A.2d 507 (1974); Commonwealth v. Martinolich, 456 Pa. 136, 318 A.2d......
  • Com. ex rel. Johnson v. Myers
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • January 16, 1961
    ...this charge was free from any prejudicial reversible error: Commonwealth v. Clanton, 395 Pa. 521, 151 A.2d 88; Commonwealth v. Richardson, 392 Pa. 528, 140 A.2d 828; Commonwealth v. Kloiber, 378 Pa. 412, 106 A.2d 820; Commonwealth v. Donough, 377 Pa. 46, 103 A.2d 694; Commonwealth v. Patski......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT