Court Opinion

ID: 9758838
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 23:52:24.761388+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:56.831378
License: Public Domain

Concueeing Opinion by
Me. Justice Pomeeoy :
I concur in the decision of the Court. I deem it appropriate to add, however, that the Supreme Court of the United States has recently held that, “The Sixth Amendment does not grant the right to counsel at photographic displays conducted by the Government for the purpose of allowing a witness to attempt an identification of the offender.” United States v. Ash, 413 U.S. 300, 37 L. Ed. 2d 619 (1973). Insofar as our opinion in *319Commonwealth v. Whiting, 439 Pa. 205, 266 A. 2d 738 (1970), held to the contrary, therefore, it can no longer be considered to be an accurate statement of federal constitutional law. In the context of the present case I see no necessity to determine whether the result in Whiting is sustainable under Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, a question that has not been presented to us.
Mr. Justice Eagen joins in this concurring opinion.