*2 JONES, J., O’BRIEN, Before EAGEN, C. and ROB- ERTS, POMEROY, MANDERINO, NIX and JJ. OF THE
OPINION COURT O’BRIEN, Justice. Nancy
Appellants, and Franklin Duane Crawford judge by a and found Young, Elaine were tried voluntary manslaughter in the guilty of death of Thomas years, Young, Jr., age of Thom- two and one-half son Ap- Nancy Young. Young, appellant Elaine Sr. and pellants’ post-trial denied, motions were were appeals sentenced. These followed.1 argue Commonwealth’s first corpus delicti was insufficient to establish voluntary manslaughter. do not crime We Miller, pathologist, The who Dr. performed autopsy victim, testified on *3 the by a of severe fracture infant’s death was caused hemorrhaging. tes Miller further skull internal Dr. and. that, caused opinion, in the fracture was tified his skull by cross-examination, the doctor instrument. a blunt On by the injury if could have been caused was asked the bumper. being He an hit with an automobile child's had possible, if an swered it was but that automobile of trauma child, there have been areas struck would single He fur of the skull. other than the area victim’s pressure that, needed ther testified because skull, in the victim’s a as was found cause such fracture his likely fallen or struck that the had not victim was Moreover, the hard substance. on a or other head stone a that there was witness testified body was found the infant’s search of area which objects that would be were no discovered and there fracture, had fallen type even if the infant to cause body top where the was an enbankment near from the allegations together the same tried and raise were therefore, appeals appeals; treat in these we will error opinion. single
263
proof
necessary
pathol-
This
was
to eliminate the
found.
testimony
ogist’s
on cross-examination that
if the child
object,
height,
from
had fallen on a hard
a sufficient
body
Finally,
could
resulted.
fracture
have
child’s
home,
found some six-tenths of a mile from his
was
route,
by
required
the shortest
would have
the two
which
year
bridges.
and one-half
old infant to cross two
opinion that
facts,
these
we are of the
the Com-
Under
monwealth,
evidence,
has es-
means
circumstantial
criminal
the infant
as a result of
tablished that
died
May,
31,
means.
451 Pa.
In Commonwealth
(1973), we stated:
long
“It has
been
law of this Commonwealth
prosecution
duty
affirmatively ex-
has no
possibility
clude the
of accident or suicide
order
Ross,
corpus
establish the
delicti. Commonwealth v.
(1961);
Pa.
quirement would, effect, require the Commonwealth every possibility to exclude that death was doubt agency. caused criminal
“In Commonwealth v. (1972) ., the that the . court held Common merely required wealth was to establish that the death agency.” was consistent with a criminal case, presented In the instant with evi support finding dence the infant’s that would *4 by type human The death was caused intervention. head, it was fracture on the infant’s the unlikeliness that by the fall, an or the location of caused automobile a and body support finding a that human intervention caused Johnson, the infant’s death. See 63, 29 A. 280 argue Appellants that the evi- next beyond prove guilt a reasonable dence failed Viewing the do not evidence doubt. We following Commonwealth, light the the most favorable to beyond guilt support appellants’ a reasonable doubt. facts appellants disappeared, picked night On the the infant up babysitter (July at about a.m. the infant from They babysitter 1973). subsequently Kit- drove Pennsylvania, home, ar tanning, proceeded and to their riving approximately a.m., at 3 a.m. At same 8:50 reported police morning, appellants the state called appellants time the missing. fixed the child Both morning missing on the a.m. child was discovered 3:30 immediately July 29, testified that they rapidly disappeared, a car heard before the child trial, At away the area of their residence. from drive appel produced witnesses who saw the Commonwealth July 29, in the a.m. on lant Crawford at about 2:30 addition, was found. area where infant exact a. appellants at or about 3:00 neighbors testified that disappearance, night heard infant’s m. on say to appellant residence and return to his Crawford re seen, she appellant Young been to which that he had plied no.” In the Commonwealth’s no, Oh addition “Oh appellants exclusive had the establishes that alive, last seen the time was control of the infant from facts, police. body Under these found until its was evidence, we the Commonwealth’s are convinced appellants’ prove circumstantial, sufficient while was guilt beyond doubt. See a reasonable Common Paquette, 451 Pa. wealth in re argue court erred
Appellants next discovery oral of certain fusing pretrial to order police recorded by appellants to the made statements mo hearing held on this A police in notes. motion, stating that appellants’ judge denied tion and Appellants con written statements. no there were such statements, police formal there were that while tend *5 they kept during questioning had written notes ap- pellants they were entitled to these and certain re- ports. not We do In our opinion, this case is controlled our in Turra, decision Commonwealth v. 192, 196, 275 A.2d where we stat- ed: specifically proscribes pretrial
“. . Rule 310 inspection pos- disclosure and of other evidence in the session Commonwealth, including oral admis- involved, sions such as here unless the defendant can exceptional show the existence of circumstances and compelling why permitted.” reasons such should be case, appellants the instant were not entitled to the they sought items discovery proved exceptional of and no compel discovery. circumstances that would See Specter Shiomos, Com. ex rel. 457 Pa. (1974). allegations other raise of error which
we need proper not discuss since failed note objection. Clair,-Pa.-, See Commonwealth v.
A.2d 272
Judgments of sentence affirmed.
EAGEN, J., concurs the result. concurring
ROBERTS, J., opinion. files a MANDER1NO, J., dissents.
ROBERTS, (concurring). Justice “corpus has, fear, The Latinism I delicti” confused majority improperly analyze and led it to issue “Corpus encompasses analytically this two case. delicti” First, frequently distinct elements which are confused. may not be on the of his ex- defendant convicted basis tra-judicial they are confessions or admissions unless by independent evidence which establishes corroborated a crime has fact been committed someone. Ware, 334, 367, every re- Second, criminal case 274-75 gardless any admission, confession or Common- *6 wealth, part proof, of must its ultimate burden of prove “beyond doubt that a crime has reasonable at 43, fact at n. 329 A.2d been committed.” Id. 367-368 n. 43. requirement instance, In the the corroboration former ‘points independent an “if un is evidence satisfied killing, although may as well accident indicate lawful quot 366, 274, . at at or . .” Id. 329 A.2d suicide’ 538, 79, A. ing Coontz, Pa. Commonwealth v. instance, however, the Com In the latter “corpus prove evidence delicti” with monwealth must proof quantity required for quality as is of the same perpetrator Ac the crime. is the of defendant sufficiency of cordingly, the evidence for we will review generally “corpus proof delicti” under the standard we of sufficiency in a employ to of the evidence review Murray, See, g., v. e. criminal case. 609, 334 Pa. argument “corpus is case, appellants’ delicti”
In this
argu-
general
e.,
their
variety,
i.
branch
second
support
is insufficient
ment that
A.
31, 301
May, 451 Pa.
convictions.
and Commonwealth
2d 368
Justices), cited
(opinion
(1972)
of three
alyzed by court its the trial quality for quantity and motions, of sufficient trial beyond doubt a reasonable concluded to have voluntary manslaughter, in- guilty appellants are eluding necessary intermediate conclusion that Young, Jr., death of Thomas was the result of a criminal act. appellants’
Because other contentions either are with- preserved out merit or were not properly appellate review, I concur the result.
Argued March 1975. April 17,
Decided