1. Whether Appellant should be awarded an arrest of
judgement on the charge of Murder in the Third Degree, as
*there is insufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, The
Commonwealth did not prove that the Appellant brought the
gun to the fight or caused it to fire during the fight.
Moreover, the Commonwealth did not prove, by sufficient
evidence that the Appellant acted with malice and, hence,
the Commonwealth has failed to prove the elements of the
crime. An arrest of judgement must be rewarded.
(suggested answer: yes)

2. In the alternative, whether Appellant be awarded a
new trial as the greater weight of the evidence does not
support the verdict. The greater weight did not support any
proposition finding the Appellant guilty as the principal,
and the greater weight of the evidence did not support any
findings of malice, and hence, a new trial is required.
The verdict was based on speculation, conjecture and surmise
(suggested answer: yes )

3.. Did the Court err when it denied the Appellant's
Motion in Limine to exclude the introduction into evidence
a statement by the deceased that the Appellant had a gun as
it was hearsay and violated Appellant's Sixth Amendmant
right to confrontation.
(suggested answer-: yes)

Whether Appellant should be awarded an arrest of judgement on the charge of Murder in the Third Degree