Lynch v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 22 November 1873 |
| Parties | Lynch <I>versus</I> Commonwealth. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Before READ, C. J., AGNEW, SHARSWOOD, WILLIAMS and MERCUR, JJ.
Error to the Court of Oyer and Terminer of Allegheny county: Of October and November Term 1873, No. 31.
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Ferguson & Murray, for plaintiff in error, as to the 5th assignment, cited Brooks v. Commonwealth, 11 P. F. Smith 352; Drum v. Commonwealth, 8 Id. 9.
T. M. Bayne, District Attorney, and W. D. Moore, for Commonwealth, defendant in error, cited Wharton on Homicide 177, 178; 1 Wharton's Crim. Law, §§ 55, 711.
By the 2d sect. of the Act of 10th April 1867, it is made the duty of the jury commissioners, president judges, or additional law judges of the respective district, to meet at the seat of justice of the county, at least thirty days before the first term of the Court of Common Pleas in every year, and select the jurors agreeably to the provisions of said section, who are to serve as jurors in the several courts of such county, during that year. The names of the persons so selected shall be placed by them, or a majority of them, in the proper wheel, in the mode and manner directed by law. The 3d sect. describes how the jury commissioners and sheriff shall draw from the proper jury-wheel the different panels of jurors.
The precepts in this case, and the venires for the grand and petit or traverse jurors, were issued on the 2d April 1872, and on the 15th of the same month were returned in due form by the sheriff and jury commissioners, by whom the names of the grand and traverse jurors were drawn from the jury-wheel in due form of law. The error assigned in both cases is the same; the clerical error of using the words "commissioners of said county," instead of "jury commissioners." Everything else in the whole proceeding was right, and the alleged error was not discovered until several months after the trial.
These alleged defects or errors are cured by the 53d sect. of the Criminal Procedure Act of the 31st March 1860, which enacts that "no verdict in any criminal court shall be set aside, nor shall any judgment be arrested or reversed, nor sentence delayed for any defect or error in the præcipe issued from any court, or the venire issued for the summoning and returning of jurors, or any defect or error in drawing or returning any juror or panel of jurors but a trial or agreement to try on the merits, or pleading guilty, or the general issue in any case, shall be a waiver of all error and defects in or relative or appertaining to the said precept, venire, drawing or summoning and returning of jurors."
Ambrose E. Lynch was indicted for the murder of William Hadfield, on the night of the 12th June 1872, by stabbing him with a knife, and was tried in July of the same year, and convicted of murder in the first degree. The circumstances attending the murder are few, and may be told very briefly. The sister of the plaintiff in error lived in a small house in Allegheny city, of whom the defendant, Lynch, was a guest. Late at night Lynch came in by a side door, and was in only a few minutes when he heard a noise, listened and heard a creaking, took out his knife and opened it. He put his shoulder to the door and shoved it; it did not go in the first time; put his shoulder to it the second time and it went in, and he saw his sister getting out of bed. He struck the deceased twice in the back, in the bed, with his knife, and a third time when on the floor in the breast. This last was the mortal wound, of which Hadfield died between twelve and one o'clock the same night. We have omitted the profane and blasphemous language made use of by the defendant Lynch.
We have read over with great care the very able charge of Judge Starrett, who explains very fully to the jury the different degrees of felonious homicide, murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, voluntary and involuntary manslaughter.
This brings us naturally to a part of the charge following...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Reilly
...each man is presumed sane. The first recorded decision by this Court to address the issue of who should bear the burden was Lynch v. Commonwealth, 77 Pa. 205 (1873). Therein the Court summarily adopted as a correct statement of the law the following charge to the "The law of the state is, t......
-
State v. Morris
...or when limited to its own terms what does not constitute such insanity. This is not error, as numerous authorities attest. In Lynch v. Comm., 77 Pa. 205, the court thus declared the law: "But the jury must confound anger or wrath with actual insanity, because however absurdly or unreasonab......
-
Commonwealth v. Calhoun
... ... Commonwealth v. Drum, 58 Pa. 9, 22; the rule there ... laid down always has been and still is the law of ... Pennsylvania as applied to the plea of insanity and other ... affirmative defenses in criminal cases: Ortwein v ... Com., 76 Pa. 414, 425; Lynch v. Com., 77 Pa ... 205, 213; Com. v. Gerade, 145 Pa. 289; Com. v ... Wireback, 190 Pa. 138, 151; Com. v. Heidler, ... 191 Pa. 375, 378; Com. v. Barner, 199 Pa. 335, 344 ... See also, Com. v. Palmer, 222 Pa. 299; Com. v ... Molten, 230 Pa. 399; Com. v. Colandro, 231 Pa ... The ... ...
-
Commonwealth v. Potts
... ... 323, 305 A.2d 354 (1973); Commonwealth v. Brown, 436 ... Pa. 423, 427-28, 260 A.2d 742 (1969); Commonwealth v ... Walters, 431 Pa. 74, 82, 244 A.2d 757 (1968); ... Commonwealth v. Yeager, 329 Pa. 81, 86, 196 A. 827 ... (1938); Abernathy v. Commonwealth, 101 Pa. 322 ... (1882); Lynch v. Commonwealth, 77 Pa. 205, 208 ... (1873); Commonwealth v. Drum, 58 Pa. 9, 17 (1868); ... [406 A.2d 1010] ... Kilpatrick v. Commonwealth, 31 Pa. 198 (1858); ... Commonwealth v. Mosler, 4 Pa. 264 (1846). Today the ... majority sweeps away this rule based upon Commonwealth v ... McCusker, ... ...