
    544 A.2d 938
    Elmer R. BAUMGARDNER, Petitioner, v. Leroy S. ZIMMERMAN, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Respondent.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Argued Dec. 10, 1987.
    Decided July 27, 1988.
    Henry G. Barr, Joel R. Burcat, Harrisburg, for petitioner.
    Keith F. Welks, Sp. Prosecutor, Chief Counsel, LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Graci, Deputy Atty. Gen., Harrisburg, Nancy M. Sobolevitch, Court Adm’r, for respondent.
    Before NIX, C.J., and LARSEN, FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT, ZAPPALA and PAPADAKOS, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the Motions to Dismiss Petition for Review and Petition to Assume Plenary Jurisdiction filed by Respondent, Leroy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, and the Reply filed by Petitioner Elmer R. Baumgardner, the Petitions are hereby dismissed as moot.

LARSEN, J., files a concurring opinion in which FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT and PAPADAKOS, JJ., join.

LARSEN, Justice,

concurring.

For procedural reasons I agree that this case should be dismissed as moot. However, it should be pointed out to the prosecutor that he should not, in the grand jury proceedings, assume the position of a jurist. All counsel should be on equal footing and when the prosecutor sits in a judge’s chair behind a judge’s bench, and interrogates witnesses therefrom, he communicates to the members of the Grand Jury that he has some “special” judicial type powers. This distortion impedes the jurors’ ability to fulfill their duty i.e., determine facts.

FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT and PAPADAKOS, JJ., join in this concurring opinion.  