Case Title: Commonwealth v. Delbridge, Aplt (Concurring Opinion)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 2004-10-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
[J-61-2002] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee, v. GERALD JOHN DELBRIDGE, Appellant : : : : : : : : : : : : 150 MAP 2001 Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania dated March 8, 2001 at No. 1202 MDA 1999, affirming the Judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, dated June 25, 1999 at No. 2027-98 Remanded to the trial court for evidentiary hearing Sept. 25, 2003. 771 A.2d 1 (Pa. Super. 2001) ARGUED: April 10, 2002 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE EAKIN Decided: October 21, 2004 In the original consideration of this case, I expressed the belief that without a threshold showing of taint, more than a defendant’s say-so, such allegations should not result in a hearing on competence. Now, there having been nothing more than young victims and defendant’s cry of “taint,” these children have testified one more time, and we are still wrestling with matters which have for years been handled with traditional jurisprudential concepts. As Justice Nigro ably notes again, this is a matter of credibility, not competence, and should have been dealt with accordingly.