79 Pa. Super. 483 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1922
Opinion by
Defendant was convicted and sentenced upon an indictment charging fornication and bastardy. All save
The only exception which appears in the record is that taken to the refusal of a new trial. This is made the basis of the first assignment of error. Careful examination of the evidence and the manner in which the case was submitted to the jury by the learned trial judge fails to convince us that the learned trial judge was guilty of abuse of discretion in dismissing the motion for a new trial. The evidence produced by the Commonwealth was sufficient, if believed, to warrant the jury in returning a verdict of guilty. As is usual in cases of this character, there was an irreconcilable contradiction between the testimony of the witness for the Commonwealth and those for defendant. It was the province of the jury to determine where the truth lay. This issue was determined against defendant after a charge free from reversible error.
The judgment is affirmed and the record remitted to the court below to the end that the judgment may be fully carried into effect.