Comm. v. Young (Dissenting Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[J-99-1999] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA , : : Appellee : : : v. : : : RICHARD YOUNG, : : Appellant : : No. 120 Capital Appeal Docket Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered September 6, 1995 in the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County at No. 92 CT 397 SUBMITTED: May 19, 1999 DISSENTING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO DECIDED: March 24, 2000 I join Madame Justice Newman s dissenting opinion to the extent that she would find that the improper introduction of Slick and Cornell s statements constituted harmless error, since the statements were merely cumulative of substantially similar, properly admitted evidence.1 See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Lopez, 739 A.2d 485, 503 (Pa. 1999); Commonwealth v. Romero, 722 A.2d 1014, 1019 (Pa. 1999); Commonwealth v. Washington, 547 Pa. 550, 557, 692 A.2d 1018, 1021 (1997); Commonwealth v. Foy, 531 Pa. 322, 327, 612 A.2d 1349, 1352 (1992). 1 As noted by Madame Justice Newman in her dissenting opinion, Slick and Cornell s statements were merely cumulative of Hull s testimony, which was corroborated by other untainted testimony and physical evidence.
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.
