# Commonwealth v. Bracey

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 29, 2009 · 604 Pa. 459

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9691993

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee v. Edward BRACEY, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 29, 2009
- **Citations:** 604 Pa. 459; 986 A.2d 128; 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2795
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Saylor
- **Judges:** Castille, Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Todd, McCaffery, Greenspan
- **Cited by:** 20 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9691993

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that “a more sophisticated analysis” may be required on state collateral review in some circumstances
- finding that there was no right to a jury trial on an Atkins claim under Ring
- observing that procedural rules “cannot trump a Sixth Amendment right to a jury”

## Opinion text

Justice SAYLOR,
concurring.
I join the well-reasoned majority opinion in the landscape of Pennsylvania law as it now exists. I merely note that, left to my own devices, I would treat the present category of claims of death ineligibility under traditional principles of state habeas corpus law, for the reasons stated in my dissent in Com *491 monwealth v. Steele, 599 Pa. 341, 434-35 , 961 A.2d 786, 842 (2008) (Saylor, J., dissenting).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9691993. Public record. Not legal advice.