# Commonwealth v. Jacobs

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · March 26, 1999 · 556 Pa. 138

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9692993

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Daniel JACOBS, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** March 26, 1999
- **Citations:** 556 Pa. 138; 727 A.2d 545; 1999 Pa. LEXIS 861
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Nigro
- **Judges:** Flaherty, Zappala, Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor
- **Cited by:** 13 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/9692993

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that “it is the trial judge who must interpret the answers and demeanor of all potential jurors to evaluate their ability and willingness to render a fair verdict”

## Opinion text

NIGRO, Justice,
concurring.
I join in the Majority opinion. With regard to footnote number 8, however, I note that I agree that a standardized Simmons instruction should be given in all capital cases for the reasons more fully explained in my concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Clark, 551 Pa. 258 , 710 A.2d 31, 43-44 (1998) (Nigro, J., concurring).
Chief Justice FLAHERTY joins in the Concurring Opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9692993. Public record. Not legal advice.