Commonwealth v. Prescott

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
• Writing for the Court: WALLING, J.
• Citation: 284 Pa. 255,131 A. 184
• Decision Date: 23 November 1925
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH v. PRESCOTT.

131 A. 184
284 Pa. 255

COMMONWEALTH
v.
PRESCOTT.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Nov. 23, 1925.

Appeal from Court of Oyer and Terminer, Allegheny County; Donald P. McPherson, President Judge, Specially Presiding.

George H. Prescott was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Argued before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., and FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER, and SCHAFFER, JJ.

Jacob Shulgold and George Wasser, both of Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Samuel H. Gardner, Dist. Atty., and Andrew T. Park, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Pittsburgh, for the Commonwealth.

WALLING, J. This appeal is from sentence on conviction of murder of the first degree. About seven years prior to the homicide the defendant, George H. Prescott, became acquainted with Fern F. Thase, the deceased, and her husband, through the sale by him to them of a piano on the installment plan, following which he made monthly visits to the Thase home to collect the installments, which were paid by Mrs. Thase. Thereby a friendship arose between her and the defendant. The latter was also a friend of Mr. Thase, and a frequent visitor and diner at their home for several years.

On the morning of April 8, 1924, defendant went to the Thase home in Pittsburgh, where he found Mrs. Thase alone, and, alter some conversation, drew a razor, and, in spite of her cries and entreaties, slashed her twice across the throat, then pursued her some 38 feet into the bath room and deliberately shot her through the heart, with a .38 caliber revolver, causing her death. Defendant then washed his hands, left the house, and disappeared. When arrested the same day, he said, "I did it; I did it," and on entering the police station inflicted a serious cut upon his throat in an attempt to commit suicide. Later defendant intimated the crime was prompted by jealousy, stating that he committed it for fear the deceased would go away with another man. At another time he expressed regret for what he had done.

When brought to trial, the only defense was drunkenness, and defendant testified he

131 A. 185

had taken two drinks from a bottle that morning with an acquaintance, and later a glass of wine given him by Mrs. Thase, and that thereafter he had no recollection of what took place until he found himself in the hospital some days later. There was no evidence aside from defendant's own testimony of his having drunk anything on the morning of the homicide, but there was some evidence that he was intoxicated later in the day and some that he was not. Considering all the evidence, including what defendant did, and what he later said he did that morning, the great weight of the evidence is against the defense of intoxication, and the jury rightly rejected it.

The effect of the charge as to this defense was that to constitute murder of the first degree required an intent to take life. If the jury were...