Court Opinion

ID: 9533733
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:34:12.360419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:29:09.266855
License: Public Domain

Justice SAYLOR
concurring.
I join the majority in remanding the claim of racial discrimination in jury selection for adequate judicial review before the post-conviction court. Left to my own devices, however, I would broaden the remand to also include a directive for the PCRA court to also conduct a hearing on the claim of deficient stewardship on the part of appellate counsel for failing to obtain judicial review of the trial court’s refusal of a defense request for a balanced jury charge relative to inconsistencies between various statements made by Appellant to police.
Additionally, on the point concerning whether Appellant should receive a sentence of life imprisonment under the death penalty statute in effect at the time of Appellant’s offense and trial, which mandated the imposition of a life sentence in situations in which a death sentence was vacated, I join the majority’s treatment based the effect of Commonwealth v. Young, 536 Pa. 57, 637 A.2d 1313 (1993), as precedent. As concerns the legal reasoning involved, however, my personal position is more in line with that taken by Mr. Chief Justice Gappy in his responsive opinion in Young. See Young, 536 Pa. at 80-82, 637 A.2d at 1324-25 (Cappy, J., concurring and *144dissenting) (concluding that retroactive application of the pertinent amendments to the death penalty statute increased the available punishment on remand and, therefore, resulted in an ex post facto violation).