Commonwealth v. Kurschinske

224 A.3d 810, No. 17 WDA 2019 (2019)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Commonwealth v. Kurschinske

Pennsylvania Superior Court
224 A.3d 810, No. 17 WDA 2019 (2019)

Facts

Virginia Kurschinske (defendant) was the manager of Spanky’s Tobacco World (Spanky’s) in Titusville, Pennsylvania. Spanky’s sold lottery tickets, and the Pennsylvania Lottery sent an investigator to Spanky’s in 2017 to investigate abnormally high scratch-off ticket sales. When the investigator arrived at Spanky’s, Kurschinske introduced herself as Amanda and signed the name “Amanda Hicks” on a verification form provided by the investigator. Amanda Hicks was the name of another Spanky’s employee. Kurschinske also falsely denied having authority to activate scratch-off lottery tickets and having access to Spanky’s lottery inventory, though she eventually told the investigator the truth about those matters and revealed her real name. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (the commonwealth) (plaintiff) charged Kurschinske with forgery and unsworn falsification to authorities. At a jury trial, the commonwealth presented testimony from the investigator regarding Kurschinske’s deception during the investigation. The investigator testified that Kurschinske had initially identified herself as Amanda, that he had discussed certain Pennsylvania Lottery policies with the person he believed was Amanda, and that the person had signed the name Amanda Hicks to a verification form acknowledging her review of those policies. The investigator further indicated that after he learned Kurschinske’s true identity, he gave Kurschinske the verification form again, and she signed her correct name without being coerced to do so. Kurschinske testified in her defense that she was rattled on the day of the inspection and believed that the investigator’s credentials were not real. Kurschinske also testified that she signed Amanda Hicks’s name on the verification form because she did not realize the form was official and thought she was simply writing the name of a Spanky’s contact person on scrap paper. Kurschinske denied having seen the verification form and signing either her own name or Amanda Hicks’s name on the form. The trial court granted Kurschinske a judgment of acquittal on the forgery charge, but the jury convicted Kurschinske of the unsworn-falsification charge, and the court sentenced Kurschinske to six months’ probation. Kurschinske filed a post-sentence challenge to the weight of the evidence supporting her conviction, which the court denied. Kurschinske appealed, asserting again that her conviction was against the weight of the evidence.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Dubow, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 791,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 791,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership