In Commonwealth v. Crawford, the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the appellant failed to raise a substantial question in challenging the discretionary aspects of his sentence. The appellant is 82 years old and is a Tier IIII registrant under Megan’s Law, meaning he must comply with certain conditions of Megan’s Law for life. He was charged with failing to register his social media accounts with the proper authorities. He was convicted after a bench trial and sentenced to 1.5 to 7 years in prison. On appeal, the appellant attempted to raise a substantial question for review by highlighting his health issues, advanced age, and the outbreak of COVID-19 at Pennsylvania’s prison for the elderly. The Superior Court held that arguing that the sentencing court failed to give adequate consideration to health considerations does not raise a substantial question for review.
