210 Pa. Super. 424 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1967
Opinion
Appellant, John Wilson, defendant below, was tried on October 15, 1962 before Judge Victor H. Blanc, without a jury, on charges of assault and battery, indecent assault and rape. He was adjudged guilty of rape and sentenced to the maximum term of 7% to 15 years in the State Correctional Institution at Philadelphia. He has served approximately 5 years.
Petition for relief under the Post Conviction Hearing Act
Defendant alleges that his conviction was against the weight of the evidence and that after-discovered evidence justifies a new trial. He also questions the competency of the trial judge.
A thorough analysis of the testimony of both the prosecutrix and the defendant leads to the conclusion that while the evidence was not so uncertain as to constitute an absolute failure to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, we find sufficient conflicting and confusing statements to raise a substantial doubt which we cannot resolve on the present state of the record.
In addition, at the conclusion of testimony prior to the adjudication, the defendant was peremptorily de
Finally, it is common knowledge that the original trial judge has been ill for several years and, subsequent to this trial, was relieved of his duties and institutionalized. This fact, of which we may take judicial .notice, casts additional shadows on an already clouded record.
In view of all the above circumstances we believe the interests of justice require a new trial. Commonwealth v. Grant, 121 Pa. Superior Ct. 399, 183 Atl. 663 (1936).
• We need not examine the alleged after-discovered evidence, since a new trial will be granted on the above determinations.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Act of January 25, 1966, P. L. (1965) 1580, 19 P.S. §1180-1.