Commonwealth v. Williams, Terrance (Dissenting Opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[J-99-2000] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : : Appellee : : : v. : : : TERRENCE WILLIAMS, : : Appellant : : : : : No. 247 CAPITAL APPEAL DOCKET Appeal from the Order entered on 10/20/98 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal Division, at No. 2362-2367 August Term 1984 SUBMITTED: June 7, 2000 DISSENTING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO DECIDED: December 22, 2004 I dissent, as I agree with Justice Saylor that Appellant has demonstrated that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate and present evidence of mitigation, including evidence of Appellant s mental health and abusive childhood, at his penalty phase hearing. Appellant, however, has presented only a boilerplate allegation that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise trial counsel s ineffectiveness in this regard. Thus, as the majority notes, Appellant has not preserved an ineffectiveness claim arising from appellate counsel s deficient performance and such a claim is the only one on which relief may be granted. See Slip Op. at 7. Given these circumstances, I would, consistent with this Court s recent decision in Commonwealth v. McGill, 832 A.2d 1014 (Pa. 2003), remand the matter to provide Appellant with the opportunity to develop his claim as it relates to appellate counsel s performance. [J-99-2000]

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.