-
NEWMAN, Justice, concurring.
I join the majority, and write separately only to reiterate the position I expressed in Commonwealth v. Chandler, — Pa. -, 721 A.2d 1040, (1998) regarding the “life means life” issue. As I stated in Chandler:
[I]n cases where Simmons would require a “life means life” instruction, I agree with Chief Justice Flaherty that the court should instruct the jury that the defendant’s sentence could be commuted. Where future dangerousness is at issue, the impossibility of parole and the possibility of commutation are equally relevant, so the court should inform the jury of both contingencies.
*317 In this case, I agree with the majority that future dangerousness was not at issue. Accordingly, I agree that the trial court properly declined to give a “life means life” instruction.
Document Info
Docket Number: 174 Capital Appeal Docket
Citation Numbers: 721 A.2d 344, 554 Pa. 293
Judges: Flaherty, C.J., and Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman and Saylor
Filed Date: 11/24/1998
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 8/22/2023