Court Opinion

ID: 9753626
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 19:20:32.98697+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:27:39.155254
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Manderino :
I dissent. It was error for the trial court not to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter. Involuntary manslaughter is defined as the killing of another without malice and unintentionally, but in the course of some unlawful act not amounting to a felony ... or negligently doing some act lawful in itself. Commonwealth v. Mayberry, 290 Pa. 195, 138 A. 686 (1927). The jury, as triers of fact, could have found that the death occurred as a result of a negligent act, since there was evidence that the fire was accidently set by the act of placing the can of gasoline too near the “hotplate”. It was within the province of the jury to either believe or disbelieve this testimony, and decide *453whether negligence was present. The court erred by taking this consideration away from the jury by instructing them not to consider involuntary manslaughter as a possible verdict.
The trial court also improperly deprived the defendant of a jury trial on the issue of malice which is a necessary element of murder and must always be decided by the jury. See Commonwealth v. Yuknavich 448 Pa. 502, 295 A. 2d 290 (1972) (concurring opinion by Justice Manderino ).