explaining the rationale for this presumption
How later courts described this case
- explaining the rationale for this presumption
- endorsing the procedural rights of a juvenile enumerated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Kent v. United States, supra
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ROBERTS, Justice,
concurring.
I agree that the photographs were admissible into evidence at the degree of guilt hearing. I reach this conclusion, however, by utilizing a different approach than that used by the majority. See Commonwealth v. Chacko, 480 Pa. 504 , 391 A.2d 999 (1978) (Roberts, J., concurring opinion).
Determining the admissibility of photographs “involves weighing the necessarily inflammatory nature of this evidence against its ‘essential evidentiary value.’ ” Commonwealth v. Martinez, 475 Pa. 331, 336 , 380 A.2d 747, 750 (1977) (plurality opinion). The photographs were probative of the degree of appellant’s culpability. They were introduced to help rebut appellant’s assertion that culpability did not reach murder of the first degree. The pictures clearly demonstrate that appellant, after inflicting a severe beating, took steps to conceal his crime. Thus, the evidentiary value of the photographs outweighed their inflammatory impact on the trier of fact and they were properly introduced into evidence.