Title: Commonwealth v. Robinson, A. (Dissenting Opinion)

State: pennsylvania

Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Document:

[J-80-2003] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee v. ANTYANE ROBINSON, Appellant : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 377 CAP Appeal from the Order entered on 4/22/2002 in the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division of Cumberland County denying PCRA petition at No. 96-1183 SUBMITTED: March 12, 2003 DISSENTING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO DECIDED: June 22, 2005 I join Justice Saylor's dissenting opinion insofar as he (1) takes issue with the majority's analysis of Appellant's claim that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and challenge Appellant's competency to stand trial, (2) disagrees with the majority's treatment of Appellant's claim with respect to the grave risk aggravator, 42 Pa. C.S. § 9711(d)(7), and instead opines that trial counsel was ineffective for conceding that aggravator under the circumstances of this case, and (3) concludes that the "in perpetration of a felony" aggravator, 42 Pa. C.S. § 9711(d)(6), can only be triggered by one of the six felonies specifically enumerated in Section 2502(d) of the Crimes Code, 18 Pa. C.S. § 2502(d). Moreover, based on the latter two points, like Justice Saylor, I dissent from the majority's ultimate disposition of Appellant's penalty phase claims and would grant Appellant a new penalty phase hearing. J-180-2003- 2 In addition, while I recognize that whether an instruction under Simmons v. South Carolina, 512 U.S. 154 (1994), was necessary in this case was an issue litigated on direct appeal and thus, the majority finds it to have been previously litigated, I feel compelled to note that I authored a concurring opinion on direct appeal in which I reiterated my view that a Simmons instruction should be given in all capital cases, but nevertheless recognized that a majority of this Court has held otherwise. Commonwealth v. Robinson, 721 A.2d 344, 356 (Pa. 1999) (Nigro, J., concurring); see also Commonwealth v. Clark, 710 A.2d 31, 43-44 (Pa. 1998) (Nigro, J., concurring). My view in that regard remains unchanged.