Court Opinion

ID: 9711582
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:34:58.804299+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:06.125835
License: Public Domain

LARSEN, Justice,
concurring.
I agree with the majority that the substantive issue in this case — the trial court’s failure to grant a demurrer — has been finally litigated as that term is defined in 19 P.S. § 1180-4(a)(3). The remainder of the opinion is superfluous — the underlying issue having been finally litigated in 1974, Commonwealth v. McNeal, 456 Pa. 394, 319 A.2d 669, it is improper to address this issue now, either directly or indirectly by way of an ineffective assistance analysis. Clearly, neither trial nor subsequent counsel can be found ineffective for “failing to preserve” an issue which was in fact preserved, decided, reviewed on appeal and finally litigated. The issue of “failing to preserve the demurrer” is, therefore, a non-issue.
O’BRIEN, C. J., joins in this concurring opinion.