Title: Commonwealth v. Delbridge, Aplt (Concurring Opinion)
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 150 MAP 2001
State: Pennsylvania
Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Date: October 22, 2004

[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 on Sept. 25, 2003. 771 A.2d 1 (Pa. Super. 2001) ARGUED: April 10, 2002 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO Decided: October 21, 2004 I continue to believe, as more fully explained in my dissenting opinion in the first Commonwealth v. Delbridge, 855 A.2d 27 (Pa. 2003) (“Delbridge I”), that taint is a matter of credibility, not competency, and is therefore not the proper subject of either expert testimony or a competency hearing. On that basis, I disagreed with the majority’s decision in Delbridge I to remand the instant matter for a new competency hearing to explore Appellant’s allegations of taint. However, as such a competency hearing has now been held, consistent with the mandate of a majority of this Court, I certainly agree with the majority here that Appellant has failed to meet his burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the children were, in fact, tainted.