Court Opinion

ID: 9635437
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 13:50:35.044964+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:09:27.223147
License: Public Domain

ROWLEY, Judge,
concurring:
I join in President Judge Spaeth’s opinion and the decision to vacate the judgment of sentence and remand for further proceedings. However, I write separately to emphasize that appellant’s requested point for charge, as written, (Majority opinion at p. 237), is not a correct statement of the law regarding voluntary manslaughter. Therefore, the trial court did not err in refusing the specific instruction presented by appellant. Nonetheless, since appellant’s request may be read as an attempt to persuade the trial court to instruct the jury regarding “unreasonable belief” volun*243tary manslaughter, as well as “heat of passion” voluntary manslaughter, the majority properly considered that issue.