Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH v. BUDD (04/16/58)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


April 16, 1958

COMMONWEALTH
v.
BUDD, APPELLANT.

Appeal, No. 60, Oct. T., 1958, from judgment of Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia County, Jan. T., 1957, No. 57, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Zanaide Budd, also known as Dolores Jackson. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

Harvey N. Schmidt and Norris, Schmidt, Green, Harris & Higginbotham, for appellant.

Juanita Kidd Stout, Assistant District Attorney, James N. Lafferty, First Assistant District Attorney, and Victor H. Blanc, District Attorney, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Watkins, JJ.

Author: Hirt

[ 186 Pa. Super. Page 66]

OPINION BY HIRT, J.

At the argument, before us, the defendant agreed that this appeal is to be controlled by our order in Commonwealth v. Harris, 186 Pa. Superior Ct. 59. Such disposition is appropriate under the circumstances. The defendant was charged and found guilty of the same kind of unlawful acts in relation to narcotics as were committed by Harris, and on the uncorroborated testimony of Ernest Jackson, the same drug addict whose testimony convicted Harris. On parallel facts (mutatis mutandis as to time, place and other details), identical legal principles govern this appeal as were found to be controlling in the Harris case. Reference is made to our opinion in that case, filed this day.

Disposition

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

19580416

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.