Court Opinion

ID: 9649651
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 15:04:46.050248+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:13.365257
License: Public Domain

*193MANDERINO, Justice
(concurring).
I join in the opinion of Mr. Justice Eagen. I should like to note, however, that I am unable to discern any rational basis for distinguishing between the standards applicable to a person acting in defense of a near relative and those applicable to a person coming to the defense of one who is not a near relative. As Mr. Justice Eagen has noted, because of recent legislation, the distinction is immaterial as to offenses committed after June 6, 1973. The distinction should not be applied to offenses committed before that date. The traditional basis for the distinction was that a “near relative” was “a loved one” while other persons were not. Accepting that human conduct can be significantly affected by the love of another, it does not follow that one may rationally infer that near relatives are always loved and other persons are never loved. Thus, the distinction should be discarded.
ROBERTS, J., joins in this concurring opinion.