Commonwealth v. Santana
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court thoroughly discussed an ex-post facto analysis and held that its decision in Muniz applies to offenders whose triggering offense occurred in another state. In Commonwealth v. Muniz, the PA Supreme Court ruled that the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) constituted a punitive regulatory scheme…
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court thoroughly discussed an ex-post facto analysis and held that its decision in Muniz applies to offenders whose triggering offense occurred in another state. In Commonwealth v. Muniz, the PA Supreme Court ruled that the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) constituted a punitive regulatory scheme that, when imposed retroactively to… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Santana
The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the defendant’s conviction for failure to comply with Subchapter I registration requirements. In 2011, the defendant pleaded to one count of abduction with sexual motivation in an Ohio court. The court required him to register as a Tier II sex offender under Ohio’s laws for 25 years. In 2019, the… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Sandoval
As a police officer, the defendant used his badge to harass, grope, and force oral sex on several women. He pleaded guilty to depriving individuals of their civil rights under color of law. At sentencing, the District Court judge ordered him to comply with the requirements of SORNA, even though the crimes to which the… Continue reading United States v. Icker
The Pennsylvania Superior Court issued an opinion regarding Megan’s Law III, sexually violent predators, SORNA I, Commonwealth v. Muniz, Commonwealth v. Neiman, and other related provisions. The opinion is best read within arm’s reach of Excedrin (or if you are one of our readers from the Garden State, maybe a green leafy substance). A defendant… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Zack
The Pennsylvania Superior Court addressed an issue left open by Commonwealth v. Lacombe: Does Pennsylvania’s sexual offense registry violate a registrant’s right to reputation provided in the Pennsylvania Constitution? Here, the defendant was subject to SORNA II’s registration requirements and claimed that his right to reputation under Sections 1 and 11 of Article I of… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Morgan
The defendant was on probation for failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements, pursuant to Megan’s Law III. Later, he was found to be in violation of his probation and sentenced to further probation. He appealed the VOP sentence. The Pennsylvania Superior Court vacated the sentence because Megan’s Law III expired in 2012 and must… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Stanley
The Commonwealth Court rejected the petitioner’s application to declare that he was not required to register as a sex offender under SORNA I. The petitioner was placed on the original Megan’s Law when he was sentenced in 1998. Over the years, he was subject to Megan’s Law I, Megan’s Law II, Megan’s Law III, and… Continue reading Adams v. Pa. State Police
In Rivera v. Pa. State Police, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court acted in its original jurisdiction to address the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act. The petitioner claimed that Subchapter I’s registration requirements should not be imposed on him, that Subchapter I is punitive, and that imposition of the requirements constitutes an ex post facto violation.… Continue reading Rivera v. Pa. State Police
In Commonwealth v. Snyder, Appellant appealed the judgment of sentence imposed after a jury found him guilty of corruption of minors and related offenses. On appeal, he made four claims of error. The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the convictions. As to the sentence, the Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The Court ruled:… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Snyder
In Commonwealth v. Elliot, the defendant filed a PCRA petition requesting the lower court vacate his Sexually Violent Predator (SVP) designation. The court dismissed his petition as untimely. On appeal, the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that, though the lower court erred in construing the defendant’s challenge to his registration, notification, and counseling (RNC) requirements as… Continue reading Commonwealth v. Elliot