Court Opinion

ID: 9692781
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 16:05:39.622428+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:36.911705
License: Public Domain

*185Concurring Opinion by
Cercone, J.:
While I join in Part I of Judge Hoffman’s opinion, I am unable to agree that we should go on to treat the question of the constitutionality of the act. The traditional policy of American courts has been to avoid the decision of constitutional issues when the case at bar may be similarly resolved on other grounds. See, generally, 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Constitutional Law §111 (1964). Furthermore, as footnote 22 of Judge Hoffman’S opinion indicates, the legislature currently has before it a bill which, on its face, appears to cure the defect which at least three of my brethren consider to be a denial of due process. Combined with the fact that striking down the instant law would cast doubt on the propriety of the incarceration of many mentally ill persons whose freedom would jeopardize their own safety as well as the safety of others, our resting the decision in the instant case on constitutional grounds would be singularly inappropriate.