DocketNumber: Appeal, 168
Judges: Keller, Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld, Parker, Rhodes, Hirt
Filed Date: 12/11/1939
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Argued December 11, 1939. Appellant was convicted of corrupt solicitation, under the Act of April 29, 1874, P.L. 115, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 3, of Helen C. Hoover, a school director of the Township of Upper Darby. His motions in arrest of judgment and for a new trial were dismissed, and sentence imposed. This appeal followed.
The sole reason argued in support of the motion for a new trial is that the trial judge erred in admitting in evidence at the trial the certificate of election issued to Mrs. Hoover pursuant to the School Code,1 because, at the time she presented it to the board of school directors at the organization meeting in December, 1933, following the November election, said certificate did not have upon it the seal of the court. In fact, such seal was not placed thereon until January, 1939. In the absence of this formality, appellant contends that the certificate was inadmissible to show that Mrs. Hoover was a duly elected and qualified school director as alleged in the indictment.
The Commonwealth proved by the original tabulation and certification under the signatures of the judges of the Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County that Mrs. Hoover had been duly elected to the office of school director of the said township at the election in November, 1933, for a term of six years. The Commonwealth also proved that she took the oath of office at the organization meeting in December, 1933; and it is not disputed *Page 576 that thereafter she exercised and performed the duties of her office.
Section 302, of the School Code, supra, 24 P. S. § 213, provides, inter alia, that at the organization meeting "the certificates of the election or appointment of all new school directors shall be read, and a list of the legally elected or appointed and qualified school directors prepared." Referring to this section, Mr. Justice MAXEY, speaking for the Supreme Court in Derringe v.Donovan et al.,
In the case at bar the certificate was a convenient, but not an exclusive, method of proving Mrs. Hoover's election. That fact having been shown by evidence aliunde, the certificate was not indispensable, and appellant *Page 577
was not harmed by its admission. See Com. ex rel. Gast v. Kelly,
Judgment is affirmed, and the record is remitted to the court below, and it is ordered that the defendant appear in the court below at such time as he may there be called, and that he be by that court committed until he has complied with the sentence, or any part thereof which had not been performed at the time the appeal in this case was made a supersedeas.