Appeals, Nos. 207 and 208, Oct. T., 1961, from judgments and sentences of Court of Quarter Sessions of Philadelphia County, March T., 1960, Nos. 1869 and 1871, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Joseph J. Nardello. Sentences affirmed.
Arthur Silverman, with him Ettinger, Gallagher & Silverman, for appellant.
Joseph M. Smith, Assistant District Attorney, with him Arlen Specter, Assistant District Attorney, Paul M. Chalfin, First Assistant District Attorney, and James C. Crumlish, Jr., District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).
[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 167]
These are appeals from convictions on two indictments charging pool selling and bookmaking upon the ground that the evidence was not sufficient for conviction in either case.
In the first case, on November 6, 1959, four officers, armed with a search and seizure warrant, entered a dwelling at 2306 South Lambert Street. In the front bedroom of the second floor they found the appellant sitting on a bed. They found with him sixty-seven slips containing horse plays and number bets. Most of them were laid out on the bed upon which the defendant was sitting. Officer McShea testified that these slips were numbers and horse race bets and totaled $8,432 per day. He also found sixteen Armstrong sheets dated from October 17 through November 6, 1959. While the police report indicated that the appellant did not live on the premises, at the time of the arrest he was alone on the premises except for a domestic in another part of the house. Lieutenant Steiger testified that upon interrogation the appellant stated that he "had been hired to take action, and that he was paid a salary of $50 a week."
In the second case, on December 1, 1959 three police officers, armed with a search and seizure warrant, found the appellant at a dwelling at 1827 Mifflin Street, in a second story front bedroom clad in pajamas. On the bed were two Armstrong sheets and two tally sheets listing names and amounts of money and eighty-five slips of paper containing 755 horse bets and 248 number bets. The officer testified that these slips were numbers and horse race bets and that the betting amounted to approximately $3,000 per day. While he testified on
[ 197 Pa. Super. Page 168]
cross-examination that the appellant did not live on the premises, it appeared that no one else was in the house at the time of the arrest. The defendant made no statement.
1. The appellant argues that inasmuch as he was not indicted for assisting or abetting another person in bookmaking and pool selling, his conviction was improper. He contends that the circumstantial evidence proved no more than aiding and abetting and was not sufficient to prove management of the pool selling or bookmaking operation by the defendant. However, none of the cases cited by him is authority for this proposition, and we know of no support for it in our cases, Any doubt about this is set at rest by our decision in Commonwealth v. Gregory, 183 Pa. Superior Ct. 53, 127 A.2d 788 (1956), where the evidence was held sufficient to convict the defendant of pool selling and bookmaking.
The evidence here, as the trial judge stated in his opinion, is sufficient to make out a prima facie case of participating in the operation of a pool selling and horse race betting business on the premises. No defense was presented and nothing appeared in the testimony to prevent ...