Commonwealth v. Almeida
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
362 Pa. 596, 68 A.2d 595 (1949)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
David Almeida (defendant) and two associates committed armed robbery. Several police officers tried to stop the robbery and apprehend the robbers. A gunfight ensued, in the course of which Officer Cecil Ingling was shot and killed. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (plaintiff) prosecuted Almeida for Ingling's murder. Almeida's defense was that another police officer shot Ingling. The trial judge denied Almeida's request to instruct the jury that, to convict Almeida of murder, the prosecution had to prove that one of the robbers shot Ingling. Instead, the judge instructed the jury that, even if someone other than one of the robbers shot Ingling, the jury could convict Almeida of murder if the jury found that Almeida was engaged in an armed robbery when Ingling was shot. The jury convicted Almeida and he appealed to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Maxey, C.J.)
Dissent (Jones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
