TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Wright v. Commonwealth

Wright versus The Commonwealth

Wright v. Commonwealth, 77 Pa. 470 (1875)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 8, 1875
Docket
No. 163
Judges
Agnew, Gordon, Merour, Paxson, Sharswood, Williams
Citations
77 Pa. 4701875 Pa. LEXIS 78
Cited by 12
Headnotes
1. The Act of May 5th 1864, prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons, not to Rights, sect. 21, saving rights of citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the state. 2. Under sect. 62 of the Criminal Procedure Act of 1860, the jury may impose costs on an acquitted defendant, although the indictment be so defective that no conviction could have been had upon it. 3. Commonwealth v. Tilghman, 4 S. & R. 127, followed.
Summary
Error to the Criminal Court of SchuylMll county: Of July Term 1871, No. 163. This was an indictment found at the April Term 1871, against Jonathan Wright, that he “ did unlawfully and maliciously carry on and about (his) person, a certain concealed deadly weapon, commonly called a pistol, with intent, with the pistol aforesaid, unlawfully and maliciously, to do bodily harm to some other person, to the inquest unknown, &c.” The defendant pleaded “Not guilty.” The jury found the defendant “Not guilty, the defendant to pay the costs.” ' The defendant moved an arrest of judgment. The motion was overruled, and the defendant sentenced to pay the costs. The defendant removed the record to the Supreme Court, and assigned for error; sentencing defendant to pay the costs because, (amongst other reasons), sect. 1 of the Act of May 3d 1864, Parnph. L. 823, 1 Br. Purd. 323, pi. 40, prohibiting the carrying of concealed deadly weapons, &c., in Schuylkill county, and sect. 62 of Act of March 31st 1860 (Criminal Procedure), Pamph. L. 445, 1 Br. Purd. 390, pi. 65, allowing a jury to impose costs on a defendant who is acquitted, are unconstitutional; and because the indictment was defective in not setting out a criminal offence.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Judgment entered in the Supreme Court, Per Curiam.

This indictment is for the offence of unlawfully *471 and maliciously carrying upon the person of the defendant, a concealed deadly weapon, to wit, a pistol, with an intent, unlawfully and maliciously, to do bodily harm to another, contrary to the Act of 5th May 1864, section 1, 1 Brightly 323 , pi. 40. Such an unlawful act and malicious intent as this has no protection under the 21st section of the Bill of Rights, saving the right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the state.

The objection to the imposition of costs, on the ground that a verdict of not guilty was rendered, is equally futile. We must presume the jury had a good reason for doing so, arising in the conduct of the defendant. And even if the indictment had been so defective that no conviction could have rested upon it, still the right to impose costs existed. This jvas expressly decided, and good reasons stated for the decision, in the Commonwealth v. Tilghman, 4 S. & R. 127.

Sentence of the Quarter Sessions for the costs affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1903: 11904: 11910: 11911: 11931: 11940: 11963: 21964: 11970: 12013: 12021: 119032026peak 1963 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Commonwealth v. McKown79 A.3d 678 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013) · Concurrence
  2. George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii992 F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2021)
  3. Commonwealth v. Giaccio196 A.2d 189 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1963)
  4. Commonwealth v. King33 Pa. D. & C.2d 235 (Allegheny Cty. Ct. Qtr. Sess. 1963)
  5. Strickland v. State72 S.E. 260 (Ga. 1911)
  6. Commonwealth v. Kocher23 Pa. Super. 65 (1903)

Most recent

  1. George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii992 F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2021)
  2. Commonwealth v. McKown79 A.3d 678 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013) · Concurrence
  3. Commonwealth v. Ray272 A.2d 275 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1970)
  4. Commonwealth v. Giaccio202 A.2d 55 (Pa. 1964)
  5. Commonwealth v. Giaccio196 A.2d 189 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1963)
  6. Commonwealth v. King33 Pa. D. & C.2d 235 (Allegheny Cty. Ct. Qtr. Sess. 1963)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Columbia Bridge Co. v. Kline, 1 Brightly 320 (1825) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list