The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed the trial court’s order, which denied the defendant’s post-sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The Court agreed with the defendant that there was no factual basis for concluding that he had committed 14 counts of invasion of privacy and a single count of criminal use of a communication facility. The Court found a manifest injustice occurred because the defendant stated at his plea colloquy that “there was nothing sexual about” his conduct, and the crime of invasion of privacy contains as an element that the defendant acted to arouse or gratify his sexual desire. Though it was undisputed that the defendant took nude photos of residents at a facility he worked at, that fact alone did not satisfy the crime’s elements.
