In Rudy v. Com., 128 Pa. 500, 18 A. 344, this court said: "The burden of proving it [the alibi] was clearly on the prisoner. If he failed to do so to the satisfaction of the jury, the alleged alibi, as a substantive defense, was valueless.
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. DucaNo. 323 MDA 2009.
November 4, 2010.
Appeal from the CP-49-CR-0000235-2007 (Northumberland).
Vacated and Remanded.
In Rudy v. Com., 128 Pa. 500, 18 A. 344, this court said: "The burden of proving it [the alibi] was clearly on the prisoner. If he failed to do so to the satisfaction of the jury, the alleged alibi, as a substantive defense, was valueless.
Summary of this case from Commonwealth v. DucaFull title:Com. v. Rudy
Court:Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Date published: Nov 4, 2010
nderstand that the Supreme Court has ruled that in every misdemeanor where the defendant denies being present…
Commonwealth v. ProphetCharles F. Kelley, Assistant District Attorney, with him John Monaghan, District Attorney, for appellee. —…