Comm. v. Jacobs (Concurring Opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[J-121-1998] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 177 Capital Appeal Docket : Appellee : : : v. : : : DANIEL JACOBS, : : Appellant : SUBMITTED: May 11, 1998 CONCURRING OPINION MADAME JUSTICE NEWMAN DECIDED: March 26, 1999 I join the Majority, and write separately only to address footnote 8 of the Opinion. I reiterate the position I expressed in Commonwealth v. Chandler, __ Pa. __, 721 A.2d 1040 (1998), regarding the life means life issue. As I stated in Chandler: [I]n cases where Simmons would require a life means life instruction, I agree with Chief Justice Flaherty that the court should instruct the jury that the defendant s sentence could be commuted. Where future dangerousness is at issue, the impossibility of parole and the possibility of commutation are equally relevant, so the court should inform the jury of both contingencies. In this case, I agree with the majority that future dangerousness was not at issue. Accordingly, I agree that the trial court properly declined to give a life means life instruction.

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.