Court Opinion

ID: 9636859
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 14:45:40.672164+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:50.254211
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Montgomery, J.:
I join in the dissenting opinion of Judge Gunther because I can not agree with the theory relied on by the majority that presumed agencies may be tacked on ad infinitum as a means or justification for transferring these cases to Dauphin County from Westmoreland County, where everything, including payment, occurred. There is no evidence that Petrosky, Sell, or Fait ever constituted the Dauphin County Postmaster or Ankney as his or their agents. Payment was not made to Petrosky in Dauphin County but in Westmoreland; and, furthermore, there is no evidence that Sell or Fait were ever paid anything anywhere.
I join in the dissent also for the reason that there is no evidence, direct or circumstantial, from which Fait or Sell can be charged with any criminal intent, an important ingredient in the crimes charged against them.
*126I would dismiss these actions because of lack of jurisdiction or venue in the Court of Quarter Sessions of Dauphin County.