To the Legal:
After studying Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille’s concurring opinion in Commonwealth v. Spotz , analyzing the critical Legal Intelligencer editorial (“Chief Justice Castille’s Opinion in Death Penalty Case Was Disturbing,” Legal Intelligencer Editorial Board, published July 11) and reviewing the procedures in Pennsylvania capital cases, a few key factors have led me to the conclusion that Chief Justice Castille acted within his rights and duties as the chief administrator of the Pennsylvania Judicial System.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
