Title: Commonwealth v. Miller, J. (Concurring Opinion)
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 399 CAPITAL APPEAL DOCKET
State: Pennsylvania
Issuer: Pennsylvania Supreme Court
Date: December 28, 2005

[J-99-2003] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT CAPPY, C.J., CASTILLE, NIGRO, NEWMAN, SAYLOR, EAKIN, BAER, JJ. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellant v. JOSEPH DANIEL MILLER, Appellee : : : : : : : : : : : No. 399 CAP Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, dated December 17, 2002 at Nos. 2775, 2787 C.D. 1992 SUBMITTED: August 20, 2003 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE EAKIN DECIDED: December 27, 2005 I concur in the majority opinion, but feel compelled to point out that Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), is no longer a “recent” decision. More than three years have passed since it was announced that each state had to set standards and procedures for adjudicating the mental retardation of a defendant in a capital case. Bills have been introduced, but no legislation has been passed to accomplish this. Meanwhile, cases languish and courts await action which has not been forthcoming. Accordingly, I concur in the need for this Court to establish the necessary standards so that resolution of these cases may be had without further delay. However, this is inherently a legislative matter -- it is hoped that the legislature would also act without further delay.