State v. Brown

In State v. Brown, the New Jersey Supreme Court had to determine whether it is an ex post facto violation to subject a Megan’s Law registrant to a third-degree charge for failing to register when the offense was merely a fourth-degree crime when the registrant was initially required to register. The Court held that Megan’s … Read more

Commonwealth v. Asher

While Commonwealth v. Asher was pending in the Superior Court, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rendered its decision in Commonwealth v. Torsilieri, 232 A.3d 567 (Pa. 2020). In Torsilieri, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether SORNA’s inherent irrebuttable presumption that sex offenders are likely to recidivate violates due process. In Torsilieri, the Supreme Court … Read more

Commonwealth v. Leone

In Commonwealth v. Leone, the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that the defendant’s designation as a sexually violent predator (SVP) was constitutional. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court previously held in Commonwealth v. Butler, 226 A.3d 972 (Pa. 2020), that the mechanism by which defendants are determined to be SVPs is constitutional.

Commonwealth v. Santana

An en banc panel of the Superior Court waded into the murky waters of SORNA in Commonwealth v. Santana. The defendant was convicted of rape in New York in 1983 and was released from jail in 2000. Under NY law, he was required to register as a sex offender for life. In 1994, Pennsylvania enacted … Read more

Commonwealth v. Duncan

In 1994, the defendant entered a guilty plea to kidnapping a minor and has long since served his sentence. In 2019, he filed a coram nobis petition challenging his sex offender registration. In  Commonwealth v. Duncan, the Court ruled that the petition for coram nobis could proceed and it need not be treated as an untimely … Read more

Commonwealth v. Lacombe

In a stunning turn of events, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Lacombe ruled that Subchapter I of SORNA is nonpunitive and, thus, applying it to individuals, who committed crimes and were sentenced before its enactment, does not violate the prohibition on ex post facto laws. This decision breaks with Commonwealth v. Muniz, which … Read more

H.R. v. N.J. State Parole Brd.

Based on a prior conviction, H.R. was subject to New Jersey’s Sex Offender Monitoring Act (SOMA) and thus was required to be monitored by GPS upon release from custody. He sued, claiming that the monitoring was an unreasonable search under Article I, Paragraph 7 of the New Jersey Constitution. The Parole Board responded that the … Read more

State v. R.K.

#CSL #SocialMedia # 1stAmendment #MegansLaw #StrictScrutiny #Overbroad In what surely is a preview of a New Jersey (maybe even SCOTUS) case, the Appellate Division determined that a provision prohibiting a parolee from accessing social media online as part of a parole provision under Community Supervision for Life violated the 1st Amendment, as the provision was … Read more