In Gottlieb v. Commonwealth, 126 Va. 807, 101 S.E. 872, 874, this is said: "It is fundamental that the court must respond to questions of law and the jury to questions of fact; that court decides on the admissibility of evidence, that being a question of law, but not as to its weight after it is admitted, that being a question of fact."
Summary of this case from Woods v. CommonwealthNovember 10, 1982.
Order allowing motion to suppress affirmed.
In Gottlieb v. Commonwealth, 126 Va. 807, 101 S.E. 872, 874, this is said: "It is fundamental that the court must respond to questions of law and the jury to questions of fact; that court decides on the admissibility of evidence, that being a question of law, but not as to its weight after it is admitted, that being a question of fact."
Summary of this case from Woods v. CommonwealthFull title:COMMONWEALTH vs. PETER A. GOTTLIEB
Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Date published: Nov 10, 1982
To the same effect see Brown v. Commonwealth, 156 Va. 947, 953, 157 S.E. 567; Diamond Cab Company v. Jones,…
The People v. Bruner263; Commonwealth v. Anthes, 5 Gray, (Mass.) 185; Commonwealth v. Rock, 10 id. 4; Hamilton v. People, 29…