Comm. v. Natividad, R., Aplt. (Concurring Opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[J-101-2007] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : : Appellee : : : v. : : : RICARDO NATIVIDAD, : : Appellant : : No. 497 CAP Order entered on 12/30/2005 denying PCRA relief in the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division of Philadelphia County at Nos. 9704-0013 & 9703-312 July Term 1997 SUBMITTED: September 5, 2007 CONCURRING OPINION MR. CHIEF JUSTICE CAPPY DECIDED: December 27, 2007 I concur in the result of the majority opinion for the reasons set forth more fully in my concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Marinelli, 910 A.2d 672, 689-90 (Pa. 2006). As the majority points out, this case does not involve any layered claims of ineffectiveness. Thus, there is no need to consider the case law analyzing layered claims and the analysis in this case is controlled by Commonwealth v. Pierce, 527 A.2d 973 (Pa. 1987). For this reason, I respectfully disassociate myself from the majority s proffered alternative analyses. As I stated in Marinelli, either Appellant has raised his claims in a manner sufficient for review under Pierce or they are waived. 910 A.2d at 690.

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.