No. 80-1-8, Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court, at No. 214 April Term, 1977, affirming the Judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Trial Division, of Mercer County, at No. 36 (8) July Term, 1975.
Michael J. Wherry, Asst. Public Defender, Mercer, for appellant.
David B. Douds, Asst. Dist. Atty., Mercer, for appellee.
Eagen, C. J., and O'Brien, Roberts, Nix, Larsen, Flaherty and Kauffman, JJ.
Appellant, John A. Skarica, was convicted by a jury of bribery. Post-verdict motions were denied and appellant was ordered to pay a fine of $500 and sentenced to a prison term of six to twelve months. The Superior Court affirmed by an equally divided court. Commonwealth v. Skarica, Pa. Super. , 411 A.2d 519 (1979). We granted appellant's petition for allowance of appeal.
Appellant first argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. The Penal Code of 1939, which was in effect at the time of the instant offense, provided:
". . . [W]hoever being an agent, employe, or servant, solicits, accepts, receives or takes, directly or indirectly, any commission, money, property, or other valuable thing as an inducement, bribe or reward for doing or omitting to do any act, or for showing any favor or disfavor in relation to the affairs or business of his principal, employer or master, is guilty of a misdemeanor. . . ." Act of June 24, 1939, P.L. 872, § 667 (formerly 18 P.S. § 4667.) (Emphasis added.)
The evidence presented at trial is as follows.
In November of 1970, Alvin Taylor, owner of Taylor Ready-Mix Concrete, entered into two separate contracts with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). By the first agreement, Taylor agreed to furnish a storage area for PennDOT's winter road surface materials. In a second separate agreement, Taylor leased a high-lift truck to PennDOT for snow removal, with PennDOT agreeing to pay Taylor $12.50 per hour for the time the truck was actually being used.
Appellant was a highway foreman for PennDOT at the time of the instant offense. As part of his duties, appellant was responsible for keeping track of the ...