Court Opinion

ID: 9766509
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:51:45.891425+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:23.485723
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen :
In Commonwealth v. Root, 403 Pa. 571, 580, 170 A. 2d 310, 314 (1961), we held that “the tort liability concept of proximate cause has no proper place in prosecutions for criminal homicide and more direct causal connection is required for conviction.” A reading of the majority opinion discloses that in concluding that defendant’s act was the proximate cause of death and that defendant is criminally responsible therefor, a weighty reliance has been placed upon precedent grounded upon the application of the tort liability concept of proximate cause. This reliance blatantly violates the principles of Root. I, accordingly, dissent.