Com. v. Smith
Decision Date | 26 November 1973 |
Citation | 314 A.2d 224,454 Pa. 515 |
Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Orlandus SMITH, Appellant. |
Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
William J. Brady, Jr. Philadelphia, for appellant.
Arlen Specter, Dist. Atty., Maxine J. Stotland, Asst. Dist. Atty., Milton M. Stein, Asst. Dist. Atty., Chief Appeals Div., Richard A. Sprague, 1st Asst. Dist. Atty., James T. Ranney, Philadelphia, Asst. Dist. Atty., Asst. Chief, Appeals Div., for appellee.
Before JONES, C.J., and EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY, NIX and MANDERINO, JJ.
Appellant was tried by a judge and jury on several charges growing out of the stabbing death of Dr. Oliver Wilson, and he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, carrying a concealed deadly weapon, aggravated robbery, and burglary. Posttrial motions were denied, sentences were imposed on each conviction, and this appeal followed. 1
The Commonwealth produced evidence that on September 26, 1969 Dr. Wilson was assaulted and robbed by a man professing to be looking at an apartment which Dr. Wilson was offering for rent. After the assault, Dr. Wilson was able to drive to St. Joseph's Hospital where he underwent surgery. Following that surgery, Dr. Wilson was conscious and lucid, but he eventually succumbed to the effect of the knife wounds on October 5, 1969.
In order to prove that appellant was the assailant, the Commonwealth produced Detective Lauer who interviewed the deceased after the incident. Detective Lauer testified that the deceased described his assailant as a Black male, age 35, 5 8 to 5 10 weighing 160--170 pounds with black unprocessed hair and a heavy mustache Detective Lauer then returned to the scene of the incident where he found, among other things, a brown wallet containing appellant's photograph as well as numerous cards bearing appellant's name and signature. Appellant's objections center upon the following testimony of Detective Lauer:
Appellant first objects to the admission of the deceased's tentative identification under the dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule. The reliability of a dying declaration is provided not by an oath, nor by cross-examination; rather, its admissibility is based on the premise that no one 'who is immediately going into the presence of his Maker will do so with a lie upon his lips.' Luch, L.J., Regina v. Osman, 15 Cox C.C. 1, 3 (Eng.1881). Consistent with that premise, we have stated that:
Commonwealth v. Speller, 445 Pa. 32, 34--35, 282 A.2d 26, 28 (1971). The record in this case includes the following strong evidence that Dr. Wilson knew that his life was in serious danger at the time he made the challenged identification: (1) The deceased was a physician and could appreciate the gravity of the procedures resorted to by the attending physicians; (2) The deceased expressed repeated concern to his wife about the amount of blood he had lost; (3) The deceased's wife detected that her husband's attitude was much less sanguine than it had been after a serious operation he had undergone some ten years prior to this incident; (4) The deceased told his wife that he had been severely butchered; (5) The deceased told Detective Lauer that 'he did not think he would make it'. In addition we must consider all of the attendant circumstances of this incident including the weapon which wounded him (a large-bladed knife), the nature and extent of his injuries (several wounds in the abdomen and arm), and his physical condition (Dr. Wilson was 66 years of age). See, Commonwealth v. Hawkins, 448 Pa. 206,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sklar v. Ryan
...time the statements were made, the declarant believed he was in fact dying, and also that death was imminent. Commonwealth v. Smith, 454 Pa. 515, 518, 314 A.2d 224, 225 (1973). The trial court found Fishman was not excited or contemplating death. Officer Maciola testified that when asked wh......
-
Commonwealth v. Levanduski, 2005 PA Super 117 (PA 3/31/2005)
...the statements were made, the declarant believed he was in fact dying, and also that death was imminent." Commonwealth v. Smith, 454 Pa. 515, 517-518, 314 A.2d 224, 225 (1973), cited with approval in Commonwealth v. Griffin, supra. Thus, the mere fact of a declarant's death is not enough to......
-
Com. v. Griffin
...appellant cites us no case with such a holding, and in fact ignores several decisions to the contrary. See e.g. Commonwealth v. Smith, 454 Pa. 515, 314 A.2d 224 (1974) (nine day interval); Commonwealth v. Knable, 369 Pa. 171, 85 A.2d 114 (1952) (ten days); Commonwealth v. Hawkins, 448 Pa. 2......
-
Commonwealth v. Cooley
... ... declarant's wounds. Commonwealth v. Gause, 459 ... Pa. 595, 330 A.2d 856 (1975); Commonwealth v. Smith, ... 454 Pa. 515, 314 A.2d 224 (1973); Commonwealth v ... Hawkins, 448 Pa. 206, 292 A.2d 302 (1972); Commonwealth ... v. Speller, supra; ... ...