ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly MtgsJuly 14 – Phone,
August 11 – San Diego, September 15 – Berkeley, October 6 – West Sacramento, October 20 – Los Angeles [details]


PA: Names being removed from sex offender registry


Pennsylvania State Police have started the process for removing as many as 5,000 ex-offenders from the Megan’s Law registry under a state supreme court mandate and a new law.

Shaquana Green appeared at a Pennsylvania State Police barracks last month to update her information as a registered sex offender. It’s an annual chore she has done for the last five years, having landed on the Megan’s Law list after disappearing with her daughter for three hours in violation of a custody order.

As of this month, though, the name of the 26-year-old Northampton County resident no longer appears on the registry, under a state Supreme Court ruling and a new exemption for parents who had been charged with interfering with custody of children, but no sex crime.

“I get to have my life,” Green said last week. “This is more than a blessing.”

Last year, the state Supreme Court ruled retroactive application of the state’s version of the new, tougher Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act was unconstitutional. In response, state lawmakers passed House Bill 631, a stop-gap measure to keep up to 12,000 individuals on the registry, but that included an exemption for legal guardians charged with interference with custody of children. Gov. Tom Wolf signed the bill into law Feb. 21. The exemption applies to only legal guardians of children, though another bill in the state Senate would remove interference with custody of children as a Megan’s Law offense; Pennsylvania and Louisiana are the only states where the crime is considered a violent sex offense even when no sexual contact occurred.

Read more


Join the discussion

  1. george

    My PSP letter dated 5/15/2018 says (in contradiction to what an attorney and PSP told me 10 days earlier) the following:

    A review of your conviction record has revealed you are no longer required to register as a sexual offender with the PSP at this time. Your information has been removed from the public website effective with the date of this correspondence (dated 5/15/18). You are no longer required to verify or report a change of address, employment, schooling or other required information to the PSP. However, in the event you travel to or reside/work/attend school in another state, you may be required comply with sexual offender registration requirements for that state. Etc, Let me know if you want me to type the rest.

    Can someone tell me what happened here? I am no longer on the website. Is this just temporary until the PA Supreme Court decides if the new law passed earlier this year is constitutional?

    • Debo

      Geo you are free and clear unless they try to pass some more BS laws.

      • george

        Thank you. Based on what I was told by PSP and my attorney, I thought the new law that was passed earlier this year required that I continue to register for life. I thought the new law only changed my quarterly registration back to annual and I was only required to report changes in employment, jobs or schools, not internet identifiers, phone #, cars, etc. My only charge is a single count of indecent assault and I was convicted in 2005. My attorney just left private practice and so I am unable to ask my prior attorney.

        • george

          I just spoke today to the PSP about my situation. I told them that someone in their department very recently told me that I would need to register for life on an annual basis. This is in contradiction to the letter I later received from the PSP saying I am off the ML website. She said that what they said in my prior call was until my case was resolved. I told her that the person did not inform me that my case was even under review. I asked if my removal was temporary until the PA Supreme Court ruled on the validity of the new law passed earlier this year. She MY REMOVAL IS NOT TEMPORARY. I then told her that I am thankful to the PA Supreme Court for ruling that being on the ML website is considered a shaming punishment. I told the officer I spoke to just now that I have been denied employment for being on the website and I have been harassed by neighbors, etc. I told her I know in my heart it is impossible for me to reoffend based on my thousands of hours of reflection on my offense (single count of misdemeanor indecent assault that occurred in 2002). I said that I can now feel free to buy a new house without fear of being harassed in my new location. She (the PSP officer) seemed to be sympathetic.

    • Brian

      It sounds to me like Pa took you off of Pa Megan’s law but you may still be under iml, International Megan’s law, not sure who to contact to let them know you are no longer required to register..

      • Debo

        IML only applies if you have to reg in another state if he doesn’t move from PA to a state that hasn’t been put in its place yet then he would fall under IML

        • Brian

          Debo I’m not sure you are right about that one because they are telling him he may have to reg in other states, I could be wrong and I have been before, so if I went to say NewYork and got pulled over they wouldn’t make me register on their ml website? I thought everyone who was on the SO website anywhere was put under the international reg as well, that’s why I don’t go vacation in other states because I don’t want to be stuck on their website as well, I know I heard of 1 state that doesn’t make us reg on their website, these laws are just bullshit if you ask me and I’m about tired of this shit already. I paid my debt and so did everyone else that’s been on this shitlist for over 15 years, I haven’t committed a crop in over 20 years, I’m a real big fing threat to society ain’t I? People that keep re offending and not stopping re offending are to people who should be on these hate lists, not me, not you, and not a lot of people, if you haven’t committed another crime in over 10 years they need to let us go, the only reason they keep us on these hate list is for money, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, no other fing reason what so ever, there is absolutely no reason to keep people on these freakin websites who got their act together, have jobs, goals, responsible law abiding, assets to society.

      • Brian

        I bet if you call back tomorrow and ask the same exact question you will get a completely different answer, I have calle a few times and got different answers every time unfortunately, one hand don’t know what the other is doing at psp.

        • george

          I only discovered this blog and report a few days ago. Looking at this a little more closely: On 2/21/2018, Gov. Wolf signed the new law regarding Megan’s Law in PA. This article of “The Intelligencer” is dated 2/27/2018 and says the following: PSP has started the process of removing as many as 5000 ex-offenders from ML registry under a state Supreme Court mandate and a new law….PSP are in the process of simultaneously reviewing ex-offenders that fall under the pre-Adam Walsh Act (that became effective 12/20/12 – I fall under this) and those that qualify for the parental exemption spokesman cpl. Adam Reed said.

          Adding to this that I have been removed from the ML website and I received a PSP letter saying this and what the PSP told me yesterday, I am now feeling fairly confident that I am now permanently removed from the ML website. I wish my attorney was still available to me, but I am pretty close to 100% sure I am off for good. I may find an attorney later to discuss IML.

          Good luck to everyone!

  2. Shaun

    Dam congrats to you I sure would like ta get one I go ta psp they tell me I don’t need ta do anything an I’ll get a letter in Oct lol Im i done or what ? aahh

    • Debo

      Brian IML says if you are required to reg in another state only applies if he lives works or goes to school in that state because he lives in PA he is not required to register anywhere now unless he moves to one of those states So IML doesn’t apply to him unless he moves works or go to school in one of those states that can include reg online college in one of those states If he applies for a passport now he will not get a identifier on his passport and he will also not have to provied 21 days notice of travel.

      • Brian

        Gotcha, I thought I understood it m, I guess not, so seeing that I was never required to reg in another state then it wouldn’t apply to myself either.

        • Debo

          Brian Your situation may be different because you stated your original state is saying you need to reg for life now, but maybe not because you said you never registered in your old state. I believe IML will look at what your requirements are in the state of your offense and any states you have been in for work school or to live.

  3. Shaun

    I mean I’m pretty sure that I am done that is just saying it’d be nice to get that letter

    • Brian

      It’s reallt not my original state that is telling me I have it reg, it’s pa that’s telling me I have to go by what my previous state says that charge mandates if that makes any sense, basically I would have plead guilty to indecent assault I believe in pa law which I believe would only require 10 year I think, the DA said and not sure why but, that before 12/20/2012 it did not require registration, the DA sent my old attorney an email stating that but that DA also said I would have to reg for life, they may not completely under Act 10 though, just a waiting game now until everyone’s reviews are finished. We know who’s are complete already though.

      • Andy

        Act 10 only requires Indecent Assault graded M1 or above. I pled in 2010 and charges included IA and solicitation IA. These were M2’s. The current Megan’s Law at the time did not have those charges as a registrable offense. With SORNA in December 2012, because I was on probation, I was placed on ML for life…retroactively because they added IA M2 on there as well. This past March I was removed from the website with no Act 10 letter or removal letter. After reading Act 10 for the millionth time I now understand why I am off…because Act 10 only calls for M1’s and not M2’s…Thank God! This nightmare is over. I pray all will get relief from this archaic type of PUNISHMENT.

        • Brian

          Pardon my dumbness but what does M1 and M2 mean, glad yiu are done with the nightmare to my friend.

        • Debo

          M1 is the highest level of a Misdemeanor M2 is a lower level Only M1 or higher IA had to reg pre sorna

        • Brian

          Thanks, that’s explains some things for the moment in my situation, hope I get some good news soon.

  4. Shaun

    Yho Brain jus wanna say you are so right after so long esp! 15 year ya should be cut loose from this punitive system that they keep tryin ta say is civil even ten especially if it’s a one time offense which it most usually is the recidivism rates prove that . it’s just a big hype to create hysteria ignorance make money and grandstanding politicians I can understand it when somebody is violent or a real danger to society I mean hell yeah we got to have law but most people are low level criminal justice department shows the the recidivism of sex offences is one of the lowest crimes ever what’s gets me is these punitive laws! that they insist on are civil and get away with it until there challenged and go in front of pa Supreme Court System

  5. Shaun

    BrIan , apologize for misspelling the name LOL

    • Brian

      It sounds to me like they they have finished your review, congrats and good luck bro. Are you an out of stater or been on pa start to finish, just wandering if they have started reviewing out of state people yet.

      • Shaun

        Brian I’m an in state pa regardless man they will get to you I know it’s hard to have patience with all this legal jargon when you damn well know that you’re do relief from it and that’s putting it mildly

        • Brian

          Yea my patience has worn thin that’s for sure, my wife’s before mine though because it was her idea to hire lawyers which I think now is a great idea, I know they will get to me eventually, was a little frustrated when the DA said I had to reg for life but I think it was DEBO who showed me parts of act ten that says different, this law is all over the place, they obviously had no time to write it due to the time restraints, I’m sure we will see a bunch of amending laws and whatnot between now and the next less then 18 months,

  6. george

    I just donated $21.00 to CA RSOL (aka ACSOL?). I didn’t know about this group until a couple days ago. Everyone should consider donating even a very small amount if they are able.

    • Shaun

      George I don’t know what planet you’ve been on but I think Janice will be very happy that you donated your $21 or whatever maybe we can get you interested in doing activist work I’ve been donating money for years literally like over a decade before Miss Bellucci was even in the head of that in California they were people like Brenda Jones you know this isn’t nothing new George so we all encourage you my man get involved

  7. Ken

    I have been wondering since all the changes why wouldn’t everything go back to what you had prior to 2012? I was originally 10 years then when it changed they tried to put me on for life but I fought it with the help of Philadelphia defender association and they changed me to 15 years.. So now that it’s been ruled unconstitutional as it should be shouldn’t those prior to 2012 go back to their original requirement? I was originally 10 years and 10 years for me is up in 3 months.

    • Brian

      A lot of people have going back to their original requirements but some of us will have to fight to be be removed, there are already challenges that haven’t come to light yet but they will, I will have to fight because they want me to reg for life even though I began in 2003 as a 10 year reg then went to 25 in 2012 due to SORNA.

  8. sean

    @ Ken

    That’s exactly whats supposed to happen…eventually. im also in the same boat. was a 10yr. switched to life, then back to 25. only difference is I am officially done by every single piece of paperwork I own. but im still in limbo waiting for psp to get off their ass’s and do something. really no excuses in my case. single conviction 10yr, with no additional issues or problems. should be no brainer right??? so what are they doing? idk? talked with lawyer again. he sent one letter to psp.( no response). he is now sending certified mail directly to psp council. instructing them that I am due relief, and am being harmed by still being held under law that no longer applies to me. so they either man up and make the decision, or I take psp to court and force it. im done waiting. yes ive been forewarned by my attorney that suing the state will cost thousands. fortunately, ive been saving what few coins ive been able to over the years and yes im prepared to spend every last dime of it….

    • Ken

      I also feel they had no right to have me come in and update which I did before that may 22nd crap.. I had already registered my once a year and my info was there.. I’m not the smartest man in the world but seriously are they that dumb that they can’t see the info that’s there?

  9. Shaun

    It’s not necessary to be spending lots of money on lawyers and crap most those lawyers don’t know a damn thing anyway they’ll tell you they do if your due relief you’ll get it ! I mean it’s not 18 months yet has it ? it hasn’t been 18 months Hell if once the dust settles and you’ve not been taken off then you get an attorney but if you got money burning a hole in your pocket and you don’t have no patience I’m sure there’s an attorney out there that will take it from you I jus think that if you know your to be takin off and your sure. Ya wait it out if they don’t take you off after your review is done and your not satisfied you go forward with an attorney

  10. concerned


    If the law was deemed unconstiontal how in the heck can the state say ok well this law is not valid any longer we will go back and use what used to be law but is no longer law since it was replaced with the new one that was deemed unconstional. wouldn’t the state be without that law until if and when they voted on a new one

    • Ken

      Good point, to me this whole thing to me would be the same as if you served time in prison and then got out and years later they come and get you because they changed the sentencing to add more time. One more thing, I never have until recently looked at the Megan’s law site and here how I feel about it.. As a parent I don’t need a dam site telling me who’s who because just because someone down the street isn’t on it doesn’t mean I’m going to feel like they’re OK.

  11. sean


    I’ll tell you why its necessary, because now im being held under a law that no longer applies to me. so you say to wait it out? for what 9-18 months for them to do something? what happens in the mean time? yes im officially done by every piece of court doc. that I own. BUT until psp sends me that SPECIAL GOLDEN FREEDOM TICKET, im still on the list. so what happens if I now want to get a job? buy a car? move to a new house? now what? I shouldn’t have to tell psp a damn thing because im done by MY paperwork. BUT do I take the chance and just go about my life, or do I go tell psp everytime I take a piss?? I say no, ive faithfully informed psp over the years, everytime I have pissed, or farted in public. my time is done, and now im being harmed by risking confinement because psp doesn’t wanna act, or take their good old time about doing it??? wait a min., THEY WILL NOT take their good old time to COME FIND YOU if you don’t comply, so whats the damn difference here? nothing….no im not waiting…..

    • Debo

      This confusion is unnecessary I will explain this again.
      1. This only applies to people pre SORNA, that were convicted in PA and never moved worked or school in another state. If this is not you your review will take longer.
      2. The new act lists the crimes that were enhanced from no time or 10yrs to a longer period of time such as IA 7 from 10yrs to Life. If you did not have to reg or only for 10yrs then were told you do or for longer you will get relief back to no time or 10yrs. You will receive credit for time on reg
      3. If you committed more than one 10yr SO and they were separate convictions separated by time to reform you will be life reg. If you have more than one and they were not separated by time to reform than you will get 10yr reg. eg two IA7 or one IA7 and a CP charge.
      4. If they removed you from the site completely they have done a preliminary review and you are still waiting for letter on final review, if you call PSP ML section they will tell you that you do not need to reg any more and that your final review will be finished soon.
      5. If you are still on the site but have no tier listed anymore they have found something in your preliminary review that is telling them that you still have time to do on the reg or you are an out of state offender.
      6. The easiest thing to do is call PSP ML section before 1pm week days so you get an actual review person on the phone and ask them specifically do I need to go in and reg or update my info. They will tell you if you do or not. Do not listen to what the local PSP tells you. If you do not need to go in the PSP ML section will tell you. If they say you can be safe and go in that means they do not know and you should the people that they are sure do not they will tell you that you do not need to go in.
      7. If you were on probation or parole or in jail or WR for any reason, that time does not count towards your time on the reg and that may be why you are still on the site.

      • Shaun

        By the way Debo shouldn’t you be getting your special golden Freedom ticket soon lol I know they told me October but it turned out they just send it to me the other week , and when I tore that paper open yes it was euphoric but like you said man we didn’t get away with nothing or any special brake for damn sure I think back in 2012 in Pennsylvania when they implemented the AWA Act cuz the feds giving them that grant money if it would have been for that a lot of this punitive unconstitutional ex post facto bulshit would have not got us in the mix of all this but that’s neither here nor there if you have any kind of brain at all and you’ve been a registered citizen you soon learn most people have no idea what freedom is. Registered citizens are on of few categories of people who have had their civil rights strip from them most people have no idea what that is like Pennsylvania lawmakers will come around I mean really Megan’s Law system wasn’t so bad until that Adam Walsh act started with the feds bribing money into PA and I mean that’s just a system I understand that just because I got my lol what’s it called. (Special golden Freedom ticket) don’t mean I just skip off into the sunset like some happy jack asshole this is something you don’t forget and you continue to fight and support for just and civil laws after all they can always be tryin to send a rock through your window with a new bill or law tied on it so that means you got to be a soldier till the day you die no easy way to be free excuse me for going on like this I wanted to thank you and Brian for some of your Insight the past few month jus happy ta get my long overdue letter

    • Shaun

      Sean. I don’t know what’s involved with your situation I know it took them 6 years past my due date to get my special golden Freedom ticket you’re talking about what a week? 2 weeks? a month ?I don’t know If you don’t get the damn Golden letter man and if not well then there’s something apparently wrong do like Debo told you call Harrisburg Megan’s Law or you can spend shitloads of money like you’re talking about sure you can do that sure I was just only trying to tell you that it seems a waste to spend money like that I think you mentioned that you had to sign up for ACT 10 will you see I didn’t act 10 didn’t mean shit to me it didn’t apply to me so there might be something in that too I’m not a legal scholar or anything but I do know Debo knows his stuff as well as a few others on here Jus call them find out if your review is finished

  12. sean

    I can understand tolling time for any time spent in jail, or behind bars, but not sure about outside. I was made to register and follow all rules as soon as I walked out the door. why would being on probation, or parole matter? if anything I was under more scrutiny under probation, because I had state supervised, and trust me when I say, they made me toe every line. time on is time on, it shouldn’t matter. other than being incarcerated.

  13. sean

    I got the act 10 letter, because in Feb. when bill was signed, I was not officially done yet. but fast forward a couple months. now I am officially done(according to my paper work). so maybe I am being impatient, sure no doubt about it. im done, so why should I have to give them any more info? just because they are taking there time? I said before, mines as simple as it gets..single 10yr, pre sorna, no additional problems, should be no brainer..there is nothing wrong other than I was as close to the finish line as you could get when they signed the law. so idk, maybe its still on the merry-go-round, when it stops, who knows…

  14. Brian

    I was told that as long as your address wasn’t jail then you get credit for that time on the reg, I see people talking about spending money and whatnot but, I just want to say this, I want to get a judicial determination, I want to go to court and fight this so I can have in writing from a judge that I no longer require being to this bs reg, I believe that I am due relief, also this new A10 violates a lot of constitutional grounds, it’s not civil either I don’t care what anyone says.. being an out of state person I am at the back of the bus and I’m not waiting 9 to 18 months so they can have tome to amend away or invent new bullshit, so yes I hired a lawyer and I’m going to spend some money even if I am due to come, I want the judicial determination because I believe there is a chance they can put you back on without it, and it may prevent them from doing so with it, plus it may help others but we shall see.

  15. Shaun

    Well people I think I’ll give it a break my mouth runs too much sometimes anyway LOL Goin to the beach and injoy a few days away Jus wanna say I with all sincerity I hope everyone gets there letter of course and that we all continue to do a part in getting these laws at lest acceptable ? I know the registry needs to be abolished it doesn’t do anything but harm and I don’t understand if these legislators are just full of so much hate and they’re so twisted and sick that they just wanted to make everyone miserable or what it seems that way sometimes. Okay before I go into a rant with all this I’d like ta think that more of these people are bein brought to enlightenment then there are those that would like to have the whole world on a dam registry so all we can do is continue to fight this and if possible educate people I mean after all for years they been brainwashing the public into thinking everybody’s out here behind a bush somewhere it’s insane so that means it’s a never-ending job and I know I’m talking to people that already know all of this so
    Lol I said I was gonna shut up for a while.

    • Wants off

      The legislators aren’t motivated by hate. Or by protecting anyone. They are motivated by staying in office and looking “tough” on sex offenders to a brainwashed and laughably easy to manipulate general public so they keep voting for them.

  16. Chicago Contact

    What does the new law 10 specify about someone completing 10+ on the registry in another state were the crime was committed and then moving to PA. Do you get credit for registry time served in the other state?

    • AJ

      @Chicago Contact:
      In the normal legal world, treating a migrated PA resident differently than a native PA resident would be a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. States are not allowed to treat someone differently just because they moved into the State versus having been there all along. However, the bizzarro world of RC laws seems to put all that on its head, and judges at times go along with it. IIRC, IN had a case like this and it was struck, so some courts do still “allow” the Constitution to apply to RC laws.

      Such a law could also be held up as chilling one’s exercising of right to travel. See: Saenz v. Roe (“If a law has ‘no other purpose … than to chill the assertion of constitutional rights by penalizing those who choose to exercise them, then it [is] patently unconstitutional.’ United States v. Jackson, 390 U. S. 570, 581 (1968).”) ( More from Saenz (edited for brevity):
      (a) . . .[A] classification that has the effect of imposing a penalty on the right to travel violates the Equal Protection Clause absent a compelling governmental interest.

      (b) The right to travel embraces three different components: the right to enter and leave another State; the right to be treated as a welcome visitor while temporarily present in another State; and, for those travelers who elect to become permanent residents, the right to be treated like other citizens of that State.

      (c) The right of newly arrived citizens to the same privileges and immunities enjoyed by other citizens of their new State. . .is protected by the new arrival’s status as both a state citizen and a United States citizen, and it is plainly identified in the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause. That newly arrived citizens have both state and federal capacities adds special force to their claim that they have the same rights as others who share their citizenship.

      (d) Since the right to travel embraces a citizen’s right to be treated equally in her new State of residence, a discriminatory classification is itself a penalty. [The State’s] classifications are defined entirely by the period of residency and the location of the disfavored class members’ prior residences. . . .The Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause expressly equates citizenship with residence and does not tolerate a hierarchy of subclasses of similarly situated citizens based on the location of their prior residences.
      I would posit such a “poison pill” statute cannot be successfully defended by a State. I’d love to see someone challenge MS on this, since they only give credit for time on MS’s ML.

      If PA doesn’t give “credit” for the time spent elsewhere, one could possibly file a pre-enforcement lawsuit to get it resolved.

      • CR

        (a) . . .[A] classification that has the effect of imposing a penalty on the right to travel violates the Equal Protection Clause absent a compelling governmental interest.


        There’s your “bizzarro world of RC laws” exception. Because “frightening and high”, you know?

        • AJ

          …except “compelling government interest” means something higher than rational basis review.

        • CR

          OK, that is a good point, I agree.

          We are talking here about regulations that implicate the right to travel, which is a fundamental right. The standard of review should be strict scrutiny, which is the context in which “compelling government interest” applies.

          It is unclear what the compelling government interest could be in adopting regulations that impose disparate treatment on registrants who move in from other states, and how the disparity would constitute the least restrictive means of achieving it.

  17. Chicago Contact

    @AJ Thanks for finding what seems to be a perfectly relevant case, but as you say, that doesn’t always win in the world of RC.

    I seem to remember reading that in Oregon, there is a specific exception from the relatively lenient registry rules for anyone moving to that state who has served otherwise sufficient time on the registry in another state to have satisfied the Oregon requirement. They are required to serve whatever additional years they would have in the state they moved from.

    And, in the legislative discussion it was openly stated that the reason was so as not to “attract” RCs to move to Oregon from states with harsher rules.

    Does anyone have an recent relevant experience in PA? I will be moving there from Illinois next year. Lifer now in Illinois, but according to my reading of the new PA law, I would have served all time required and would not have to register in PA.

    • AJ

      @Chicago Contact:
      This is where the States like to play it both ways. Some States (MN comes to mind, and apparently OR) impose the greater of their or your convicting State’s terms. So a lifer moving to MN would be a lifer, even if s/he would be a 10-year term had they been convicted in MN. I suspect this, too, violates the above case law for the same reasons laid out. But, I am quite sure MN (or whatever State) would then throw out the Full Faith and Credit Clause, stating they must adhere to the acts and judgments of the other State, and thus must “honor” the lifetime status. Funny, though, that they don’t do that when it’s to the RC’s advantage.

      The posture of trying to dissuade someone from moving is exactly what Saenz v. Roe is about. Using a law in that manner is a patent violation of the 14th Amdt. OR’s “anti attraction” intent…nevermind its effect…violates Saenz.

      Keep Saenz v. Roe in the back of your mind for when you move there. If you’ve registered long enough to satisfy your PA-equivalent offense had you committed in PA, you may have a very strong argument. PA would have to show how just by living outside PA’s boundaries, time has somehow stood still for your rehabilitation and risk versus similarly situated, native PA residents.

  18. Brian

    @Chicago Contact
    I am an out of stater living in pa, I started registration here but was charged and convicted in Co, my old lawyer was dealing with the DA which were the wrong people to me dealing with on my case, the DA said under Act 10 my previous state required life time reg so I would have to do life in pa. I will be going to court soon on this matter hopefully to fight this nonsense law. But that just what I have been told by the DA, my attorney on the other hand has different thoughts on that. Like I said that what I was told, it’s not proof of anything that I know of right now.

    • Debo

      I believe some people are confused about equal protection The PA law states that any person that registers is subject to what ever time is greater on reg this is equal acrossed the board because everyone is subject to this Just because an in state person is not subject to two different states reg laws doesn’t make it inequality for someone that is.

      • AJ

        I believe some people are confused about equal protection
        Talking about yourself, or the Federal Judge in Indiana ( In issuing a preliminary injunction (i.e. Plaintiffs are likely to prevail), and quoting Saenz v Roe, the Judge wrote:
        [T]he Supreme Court has expressly rejected the notion that a person must be deterred in his interstate travel in order for his fundamental rights to be implicated. In Saenz, the Court explained
        that it was not “concerned solely with actual deterrence to migration.” Rather, because “the right to travel embraces the citizen’s right to be treated equally in her new State of residence, the discriminatory classification is itself a penalty.”

        When the Plaintiffs arrived in Indiana they were not afforded the same status as persons who had resided in Indiana all along. As a result of the DOC’s policies, longterm Indiana residents who have never travelled out of state are treated differently than new Indiana residents. This differential treatment offends the fundamental right to travel.
        The only interest proposed by Defendants is one in preventing Indiana from “becoming a sanctuary destination for sex offenders from around the entire country.” Assuming, arguendo, that this qualifies as a compelling state interest, SORA is not narrowly tailored to achieve that interest because it is vastly overinclusive.
        Huh. So apparently this crazy Judge found that people who were “subject to two different states reg schemes” were found to have had their fundamental right to travel offended.

        Since it implicates the fundamental right to travel, a law imposing higher standards on a migrant versus a non-migrant is subject to strict scrutiny. As such, PA would need to show a compelling governmental interest why someone who committed a particular offense ex-PA needs to be subjected to a longer duration than if said offense had been committed in PA, and then narrowly tailor the law to achieve that purpose.

        I think I’ll side with the Federal District Judge…and SCOTUS. But you’re right, some people are indeed confused about Equal Protection.

        P.S. This case is ongoing. There have been a number of Motions to Dismiss by the various Defendants, as recently as 06/06/2018, and they’ve been denied. The Defendants have also filed multiple Motions for Summary Judgment…and thus far have gotten nothing but crickets back. Finally, the county Sheriffs, under 7th Circuit precedent, have been legally declared to be acting as State, not municipal, agents. So much for escaping 42 USC 1983! (

  19. Debo

    Brian some people on here clearly do not see that this doesn’t violate equal protection. The PA law treats everyone the same just because a person may be subject to two different states reg schemes does not create an inequality because they are receiving what ever time is greater For instance a person that committed their crime in PA IA7 is subject to 10yr reg in PA if a person from FL with a comparable offense moves to PA they are still subject to their original states reg time PA law is stating that anyone subject to a longer time from another state has to do that time just because a person from PA isn’t subject to a longer time from another state doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be if they had committed their crime in FL. and vice versa if Pa says life and Fl says 10 yrs for CP then giving someone life for CP in PA is the same for everyone in PA Its a hard thing for some people to grasp. The one thing that I believe is inequality is if a person is no longer subject to reg in the state they committed their crime in and then moves they should not have to reg in the new state.

    • Brian

      Absolutely right, but I was never required to register and was never ordered by the original court to register, when I got to pa as you know I had to start registration in 03 after living in pa for 4 years, that is why my attorney says otherwise, why would pa make me reg for 10 years and not life in the beginning and then when SORNA got us it went to 25 but not life, now with the new law it says life, why al of a sudden do they want to go with what ever my previous state law says now? And besides act 10 is already screwed because now they want to add the 5000 feet residence restrictions which makes it more punitive.

  20. Brian

    That’s very similar indeed my man, one difference is that he was required to register in his state for ten years, as you already no I was not, I think this is what will make them think a little more about my case but I’m sure people are tired of seeing me post about my case, so stupid question, when the writ of mandamus is sustained, that means he won his case, correct?

    • Debo

      Barbie don’t be a hater you forgot Paul also Anyway thanks Ken We use to have an issue with people that did not fall into the immediate relief category confusing the ones who did but I think now people know where they stand. Brian no he lost based on the fact that he was not required to reg under his old states laws when SORNA in PA was enacted So this shows that ether way PSP tries to F you you have them beat. You were made to reg in PA and you were reg in PA when they enacted new act 10 so the worst they could do is give you 10yrs which you have done.

  21. Brian

    Thanks for replying, so now it’s a waiting game for psp to get to my review and my attorney forcing them to removed me, should be fun now.

  22. sean

    so I missed a phone call from my lawyer that something good was about to happen, I was working, and cant call him back till tomorrow, which I will be doing first thing in the morning…I am a 10yr pre sorna, with a single conviction that got screwed like everyone else back in 2012. since psp has been dragging their feet for whatever reason, I hired a lawyer. the first interaction my lawyer had with psp ml. went on deaf ears, like they didn’t I left some time go by figuring psp would do the right thing, well they didn’t…so apparently the second interaction directly with psp council, informing them, that I was due relief, and tired of waiting, that I would in fact be suing the state, and psp for harm holding me under the new law. Well just because curiosity was killing me, I checked the sight tonight, and FINALLY, I HAVE BEEN REMOVED from the sight. now whats that mean, don’t know yet since I haven’t talked to lawyer, or RECEIVED any official notice from not holding my breath here, but maybe, just maybe……so does this mean psp is finally getting their shit together, or is it going to be the threat of a suit, to get them to do anything? your guess is as good as mine, I hope to find out more tomorrow.

    • David

      It was probably only the threat of a lawsuit that got PSP to take action and remove your name. IMHO

    • rich

      I completed my 10 year teir 1 time in PA on 6/17/18 but have not been taken off as of today. My sentence was to be 10 years under the old law. They sent me a paper to register early this year in April. i thought the supreme court said they had to take us off after the 10 year teir one was done. Comments are welcome.

      • Debo

        @Sean good news thanks for your updates looking forward to hear what your lawyer has to say.

        @Rich in act 10 they have an extension in the law that adds time past the ten yrs for administrative stuff to give them time to remove you they do not say how long that is but my guess is you’ll be taken down soon.

        • Terry Brunson

          I am a pro se fighter in the commonwealth court under 463 MD 2017 fighting for a judicial determination in rejection of PSP voluntary cessation to kick me off the registry. On 9 feb 2018 I was kicked off. . . . . but on feb 22 2018 I was put back on under ACT 10.

          I filed Equal Protection suit being from Texas 1999 conviction and Pa wanting to apply 9799.15(a)(7) which is limited to ACT 10 amendment up to 12 – 20- 12 and that is the line.

          Also 9799.13(3)(i) on the same issue was deleted. 9799.15(a) is my fight. Also I claimed in the brief that former Megan’s Law 3 was deemed unconstitutional by Commonwealth V. Nieman and expired by 42 C.S. 9299.42 and 1 Pa. C.S. 1971(a) to the fact that the PSP cannot apply 9795.1(a) or (b) too include 9795.2 of Megan’s Law 3 being expired.

          I also filed Pro se in the commonwealth court 339 MD 2018 to challenge ACT 10 and I may amended that to add ACT 29 when I get notice to register under ACT 29

          I am new to this forum and a friend of mine Brian suggested I post here

    • Mike s


      I went through same process back in Feb where my attorney reached out to John Herman directly and I got the email a week later telling me that my status changed. I did not received my actual letter for over a month.

      Congrats on being removed!


  23. Terry Brunson

    ACT 10 is not a new Law it is an amendment of SORNA

    SORNA was not deemed unconstitutional in it entirety, only the retroactive application was deemed unconstitutional.

    What does that mean?

    The ACT 10 LAW is not applicable because it is a continuation of registration requirements of SORNA by subchapter “I” and the main Law is Subchapter “H”

    In order to be under subchapter “I” subchapter “H” has to be repealed in it entirety and the new Law would take its place as new law. The construction of statues ACT of 1 Pa C.S. 1971(a) says this clearly.

    appeal challenge will show the high court that that the Pa. legislatures are not too smart in making laws fit to muster constitutional soundness.

    42 Pa. C.S. chapter 97 subchapter “H” is SORNA -1 enacted 12 December 2012

    42 Pa. C.S. chapter 97 subchapter “I” is SORNA -2 which is an amendment to SORNA -1

    SORNA one is the main Law – SORNA – 2 ACT 10 is the amendment. There are two active SORNA application in law in PA and there is soon to be a 3rd called ACT 29.

    If the Pa. Assembly would read what they wrote in 1 Pa. C.S. 1971(a) they would be clear that you cannot have an amendment to a law acting as a whole new law as ACT 10 seems to be doing……..

  24. sean

    So, just got done talking with my attorney, and this is what he told me, AFTER talking DIRECTLY with psp council. they are in fact doing reviews. However because they “have so many” to go through, that its a larger task than they originally anticipated. and I get that, but they have known about this since scotus denied cert. so they could have been working on it then, but was betting and banking on the legislators to come up with something that could circumvent the muniz decision. well they found out, THEY CANT get around the decision. it is what it is, and is now law, whether psp, or the legislators like it or not. so what happened in my case was that, YES, they WOULD have got to me EVENTUALY, and YES, WOULD have done the right thing, EVENTUALY, but who knows how long it would have takin. So it WAS the fact that I WAS GOING TO PRESS the issue with a suit, that got them to MOVE ME TO THE BEGINING OF THE LINE, not that I was due the relief that got them to act… this is my take on it….IF, and only IF, you are 100% sure you are due relief, you have two options. WAIT, and they WILL get to you EVENTUALY, or if its worth a few hundred bucks to you(it was for me) have an attorney contact their COUNCIL, NOT PSP ML, they don’t give a shit, but if you contact their lawyers, now they know your serious, and either they do something, or you will…guess choice is yours to make…..but as of right now I am officially OFF the sight, and will be receiving a letter from psp stating so… light of the fact that the legislators are at it again trying to pass more bull shit residence restrictions, im still going to keep on top of things, as this is getting out of hand, and anyone who is still in this situation needs all the support they can get..its an up hill battle, but I believe we will get there…EVENTUALLY.

    • Debo

      I’d like to know why some people got an official letter right after they were removed and some of us were removed but still no letter. I know they have a lot of cases to go through but I think they are purposely holding these letters back for some reason.

      • Debo

        Just got my letter today saying I no longer have to register. I did not have a lawyer so I think more people are going to start getting their letters now by the looks of things I hope we see more cases get in front of the PASC and SCOTUS to bring the Nazi political fear mongering crap down. Everyone hang in there.

        • Ken

          Congrats Debo hopefully you continue to follow and post here. My 10 years is up in 2 months so I am hoping I get my letter saying I an done then as well.

        • Debo

          I will Ken thanks Glad to hear you’re a short timer I have to say I realize we still will have a record and things can still change for us but its a huge weight off my shoulders I believe we will have more opportunities and some employers will be more willing to give us a shot now.

        • Rich PA

          debo, what was the date that you were supposed to get off the list and the date they sent you a letter to take you off? I was due to be off June 17, 2018 but i am still on and heard NOTHING from PSP What goes , any idea ? PA list

        • Shaun

          Debo well it’s about time damn it I’m very freaking happy for you man you actually did help me out on some advice a few times that really meant something to me thank you and good luck to you my man

  25. Shaun

    Well I’ve been reading on here and it seems like it’s the same old shit got a couple guys on here that know a little something and Council the ones that don’t. Lol I guess that’s a good thing

    • Debo

      @rich I went way past my 10yrs they took me off site a few months ago just got letter I been on reg since 2004

    • Debo

      @shaun thanks bro good luck to you too.

  26. Shaun

    And all I’ve been off for weeks now I’m just glad to see people are starting to finally get off the Nazi registry especially people that should done been off long ago !! Thank you god

    • Debo

      @ Rich I called PSP ML section they told me my review was not finished yet several times then they took me off the site a few months ago called them back they said I didn’t have to update anymore but they are still working on my final review just got letter. My guess is If you call ML section now that you have finished your time they should be able to give you an idea what is going on might take some time to review because they are behind with the ones that were finished before the law kicked in. I would think they should be able to tell you if you still need to reg or not. Before they removed me from site they played stupid and wouldn’t tell me if I had to go in to reg or not I took my chances and did not go in to reg on my update date then a few weeks after that they took me off site.

  27. Brad

    Just wondering if I should get an attorney or save my money and wait it out. I moved to PA in 2003 the state I came from I was a 10 yr registrant which I got my letter from them ending my requirements in 2013. When I moved here I was a 10 yr registrant until SORNA. I haven’t heard anything on my review but when I call PSP they said to fax them a copy of the letter from Iowa which I did. But like I said still waiting. I heard they are treating out of state SO’s differently. So should I or should I not get an attorney which I have no idea who to contact if I should.

    • Debo

      Brad because you have a letter from your old state proving your old reg is done and PA had you as a 10yr then I would say wait it out PSP has followed thru so far if you did not have that letter I would say lawyer up. If you have the extra cash it cant hurt to consult with an attorney I would call PSP ml section again and ask do I need to update anymore and they should give you info on your review

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *