Court Opinion

ID: 9696783
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:58:27.198174+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:18:28.252748
License: Public Domain

*291NIGRO, Justice,
concurring.
I join the majority opinion but write separately only to clarify my position regarding Appellant’s claim that he was entitled to a Simmons instruction at his penalty hearing. Under the current state of the law, I am compelled to agree with the majority that the trial court did not err in failing to issue a Simmons instruction in the instant case, as Appellant did not request such an instruction nor did the Commonwealth raise the issue of Appellant’s future dangerousness. However, for the reasons more fully explained in my concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Clark, 551 Pa. 258, 710 A.2d 31, 43-44 (1998), I continue to believe that the better approach would be to give a standardized Simmons instruction in all capital cases.