Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

COMMONWEALTH v. TYSON (09/12/63)

September 12, 1963

COMMONWEALTH
v.
TYSON, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 166, Oct. T., 1963, from judgment of Court of Quarter Sessions of Lycoming County, May T., 1962, Nos. 216 and 217, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Edward Sylvester Tyson et al. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

Alvin Lecot Tyson, appellant, in propria persona.

Bertram S. Murphy, First Assistant District Attorney, and Paul W. Reeder, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.

Author: Montgomery

[ 201 Pa. Super. Page 468]

OPINION BY MONTGOMERY, J.

This is an appeal taken and submitted to us by Alvin Lecot Tyson, one of the defendants, without counsel, from a judgment of sentence for the crimes of armed robbery, larceny of a motor vehicle, and violating the Uniform Firearms Act. Appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings in the lower court until shortly before the argument of his motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, at which point his counsel, Martin M. Fine, Esq., withdrew from the case. Thereafter he refused the court's offer to appoint new counsel for him and gave as the reason for his refusal, "that he desired to argue the

[ 201 Pa. Super. Page 469]

    case himself." On the refusal of his motions he filed this appeal, and in doing so he was relieved of payment of the usual filing fees, and was supplied with a copy of the testimony which he has not been required to print.

The matter is now before us on briefs submitted by both appellant and appellee. There were no oral arguments.

The reasons assigned by counsel for appellant in support of the motions before the lower court for a new trial and judgment n.o.v. may be grouped as follows: (1) there was a variance between the indictment and the evidence; (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict; (3) the verdict was contrary to and against the weight of the evidence; (4) the court erred in not granting his motion for a demurrer and binding instructions in his favor; and (5) Tony Cillo, a defense witness, was not permitted to testify.

In this appeal appellant lists the following assignments of error:

(a) The lower court erred in failing to grant the motions of his case at ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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