454 PA 215 - Commonwealth v. Sampson

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently November 2003 · most notably Commonwealth v. Hubbard (1977), Commonwealth v. DeHart (1986)

59 state decisions

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.

¶1Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Eagen :

¶2The summation of the assistant district attorney in this case violated the rules of propriety and was an immature attempt to convict the accused by appealing to the passions and prejudices of the jury. Moreover, it constituted the giving of testimony by an unsworn witness. See Commonwealth v. Clark, 322 Pa. 321, 185 A. 2d 764 (1936). In my view, a new trial is, therefore, required.

¶3 *221Regardless of the nature of the crime charged, the accused is entitled to a fair and impartial trial. The summation of the assistant district attorney instantly deprived the accused of this right.

¶4It is true that defense counsel failed to interpose a timely objection,1 but as this Court said in Commonwealth v. Stowers, 363 Pa. 435, 437, 70 A. 2d 226-227 (1950) : “[I]n a homicide case, where a defendant’s life or liberty is at stake, and where defendant may have been deprived of a fair and impartial trial, or suffered manifest injustice, and appellate court will review the case notwithstanding the failure of defendant’s counsel to take proper exceptions.” [Emphasis original.] See also Commonwealth v. Silvis, 445 Pa. 235, 284 A. 2d 740 (1971), and Commonwealth v. Lynott, 133 Pa. Superior Ct. 565, 3 A. 2d 207 (1938).

¶5I respectfully dissent.

¶6 The error was raised in the motion for a new trial.