Opinion
Submitted May 25, 1971.
December 20, 1971.
Criminal Law — Evidence — Sufficiency — Appellate review — Murder in the first degree.
1. On appeal by defendant following conviction and judgment of sentence, in reviewing the record to determine whether the verdict was justified, the Commonwealth, as the verdict winner, is entitled to have its evidence and all reasonable inferences derived therefrom accepted as true, and all disputed facts resolved in its favor. [283]
2. On appeal by defendant from judgment of sentence following a jury verdict of murder in the first degree, it was Held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict.
Before BELL, C. J., JONES, EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY and BARBIERI, JJ.
Appeal, No. 35, May T., 1970, from judgment of sentence of Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, No. 992 of 1969, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. James Wesley Miller. Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Indictment charging defendant with murder. Before HERMAN, J.
Verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree; post-trial motions by defendant denied, and judgment of sentence entered. Defendant appealed.
Arthur K. Dils, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
Jerome T. Foerster, Assistant District Attorney, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
This case comes to us on direct appeal from a judgment of sentence of life imprisonment following a jury verdict of murder in the first degree.
Of appellant's several assignments of error, only one, the sufficiency of the evidence, has a semblance of merit.
Appellant asserts error in the admission of certain evidence, and in the trial court's refusal to read one of appellant's points for charge. Our review of the record reveals both claims to be without foundation.
It is of course the rule that in reviewing the record to determine whether the verdict was justified, the Commonwealth, as the verdict winner, is entitled to have its evidence and all reasonable inferences derived therefrom accepted as true, and all disputed facts resolved in its favor. Commonwealth v. Ewing, 439 Pa. 88, 264 A.2d 661 (1970); Commonwealth v. Cooney, 431 Pa. 153, 244 A.2d 651 (1968).
We have closely examined the record, viewing the evidence in light of the above standard. In sum, the record contains eyewitness testimony which placed the appellant in close proximity to the victim at the time of the shooting, established the discharge of a firearm, and described the victim's immediate collapse and her anguished cry calling appellant by name. The use of a lethal weapon on a vital portion of decendent's body was undisputed as the cause of death. Appellant was shown to have made threats against the victim's life in heated altercations prior to the murder. These factors provided a more than adequate basis for the verdict of the jury.
Judgment of sentence affirmed.