For Your Data Republic V. Koczwara Illustration Brief
March 18, 2020
Edit
Commonwealth v. Koczwara representative brief summary
155 A.2d 825 (1959)
CASE FACTS
Defendant was convicted of 2 counts of permitting minors to frequent his licensed premises without parental or other supervision in addition to 1 count of permitting sales of liquor to minors inward violation of the Code. He received a judgement of imprisonment in addition to a fine. Defendant sought review in addition to the courtroom of appeals affirmed the judgments. Defendant filed a petition for an allowance of an appeal, which the courtroom granted. The accused asserted that the evidence did non back upward the conviction in addition to sentence.
DISCUSSION in addition to HOLDING
CONCLUSION
The courtroom affirmed the conviction nether the Code, declared that the judgement of imprisonment was invalid, in addition to left the imposition of a fine intact.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law
155 A.2d 825 (1959)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant filed a petition for an allowance of an appeal of a judgment of the Superior Court (Pennsylvania), which affirmed the judgment of the courtroom below that convicted in addition to sentenced accused to a term of imprisonment in addition to payment of a fine for violations of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code (Code).CASE FACTS
Defendant was convicted of 2 counts of permitting minors to frequent his licensed premises without parental or other supervision in addition to 1 count of permitting sales of liquor to minors inward violation of the Code. He received a judgement of imprisonment in addition to a fine. Defendant sought review in addition to the courtroom of appeals affirmed the judgments. Defendant filed a petition for an allowance of an appeal, which the courtroom granted. The accused asserted that the evidence did non back upward the conviction in addition to sentence.
DISCUSSION in addition to HOLDING
- The courtroom held that:
- (1) the Code imposed vicarious responsibleness for the offenses charged,
- (2) a judgement of imprisonment nether the Code was invalid nether the Pa. Constitutional Article I, § 9,
- (3) the fine was proper, and
- (4) the lawsuit courtroom was jump nether § 494 of the Code to impose the enlarged prescribed penalisation because accused was proven to locomote a 2d offender nether the Code.
CONCLUSION
The courtroom affirmed the conviction nether the Code, declared that the judgement of imprisonment was invalid, in addition to left the imposition of a fine intact.
Recommended Supplements for Criminal Law