Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

190 Pa. 23

Commonwealth v. Shew

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 13, 1899

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1899-02-13

Appeal, No. 399, Jan. T., 1899, by defendant, from judgment of O. & T. Susquehanna Co., April T., 1898, No. 1, on guilty of murder of the first degree. Indictment for murder. Before Seable, P. J. The facts appear by the report of Commonwealth v. Eagan, ante, p. 10. Error assigned among others was in admitting the confession made to the district attorney.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1899-02-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1941

7 state decisions

30189919001910192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Opinion by

Mr. Justice Mitchell,

¶2The' appellant Avas indicted jointly with James Eagan but severed in the trial. Both were convicted of murder of the first degree. ' The questions raised upon their appeals are substantially the same, and have been disposed of in the opinion in Eagan’s case, filed herewith, ante, p. 10.

¶3Each prisoner made two statements or confessions in which he admitted participation in the crime but sought to put the actual killing upon his confederate. In Eagan’s case no contradiction of the confessions was made by the prisoner or by any witness in his behalf though his counsel argued that the circumstances showed duress. In the present case, however, Shew went on the stand and testified that the confessions were extorted from him by promises and threats of the district attorney. The confessions had already been admitted in evidence upon affirmative testimony that they were voluntarily made and the only effect of Shew’s testimony to the contrary was to raise a question for the jury. It was properly submitted to them with instructions to disregard the confessions if they found they were not voluntarily made. In this there was no error.

¶4Judgment affirmed and record remitted for purpose of execution according to law.

/190/pa/23 · .json · Public domain