Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. Eichinger, J., Aplt

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 31, 2014No. 657 CAPPublished

1ConcurrenceChief Justice Castille

I join the Majority Opinion as well as the Concurring Opinion by Mr. Justice Stevens. I write separately because this state capital case is another example of the consequences of federal taxpayer money being diverted to misuse, to fund the obstructionist agenda by appellant’s counsel, the Federal Community Defender’s Office (“FCDO”).1 There is no color-able question respecting appellant’s guilt for the brutal murders of three women and a three-year-old infant. At the guilt phase of his bench trial, appellant did not offer a defense, did not contest the charges against him, and stipulated to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Commonwealth v. RoneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  3. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API