Commonwealth v. Socci

• Decision Date: 14 January 1955
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Alex SOCCI, alias Alex Solki, alias Alex Salkay, Appellant.
• Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court

110 A.2d 862

177 Pa.Super. 426

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Alex SOCCI, alias Alex Solki, alias Alex Salkay, Appellant.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

January 14, 1955

Defendant was convicted of larceny. The Court of Quarter Sessions, Indiana County, at No. 57, March Sessions, 1952, E E. Creps, P. J., refused motion for new trial, and defendant appealed. The Superior Court, at No. 36, April Term, 1954 Gunther, J., held that reading the entirety of a previous indictment, on one count of which defendant had been acquitted, was prejudicial.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered.

Only records of prior convictions of felonies and misdemeanors in nature of crimen falsi are admissible to attack credibility of a defendant, and records of arrests or indictments without conviction are inadmissible.

Norman Landy, Wolken & Landy, Pittsburgh, for appellant.

J. Murray Butterbaugh, Dist. Atty., R. Carlyle Fee, Special Asst. Dist. Atty., Indiana, for appellee.

Before RHODES, P. J. and HIRT, ROSS, GUNTHER and WRIGHT, JJ.

GUNTHER, Judge.

Defendant was tried and convicted of larceny. Sentence was imposed and motions for a new trial were refused by the court below. Defendant complains of the admission into evidence of his prior conviction of a felony and the manner of its introduction.

The defendant took the stand in his own behalf and denied any connection with the crime charged. For the purpose of impeaching his credibility the Commonwealth introduced the record of a prior conviction. This is an approved method of attacking credibility: Commonwealth v. Gibbs, 167 Pa.Super. 79, 74 A.2d 750. However, the defendant objected to the introduction of this record on the ground that the Commonwealth did not produce a proper custodian of the record to prove the accuracy and completeness thereof. The record introduced was a duly certified copy of the record from the Court of Quarter Sessions of Allegheny County. A record which bears the seal of any court in the state is admissible, since the court will take judicial notice of the seal: Commonwealth v. Snowden, 1 Brewst. 218. Furthermore, defendant admitted on the stand that he was on parole at the time. It is not, therefore, seriously contended that the Commonwealth did not introduce a true record of a prior conviction.

However, defendant's other objections are well taken. In introducing the record of the prior conviction of a felony, the Commonwealth read the entire indictment, including a count for a crime of which defendant was found not guilty. The defendant had been convicted of receiving stolen goods and acquitted of the charge of burglary, yet the district attorney read the indictment in full on all accounts. Such a procedure is clearly prejudicial. Even a reference to a prior indictment or arrest has been held...