PA: U.S. Supreme Court denies appeal of sex offender decision

The U.S. Supreme Court will not hear a challenge to a recent state court ruling that determined part of Pennsylvania’s sex offender registration law was unconstitutional. Full Article

Related

https://floridaactioncommittee.org/scotus-refuses-to-hear-pa-case-that-found-sex-offender-registry-punishment/

http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-121B-2016oajc%20-%2010317692521317667.pdf

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

314 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

👍😀 A great photo caption!!! Captions like this may show that – God willing – the tide is beginning to turn!
“Sexual offender registries were passed under the assumption that offenders are likely to commit more crimes, yet studies show only a small portion are likely to re-offend.” http://cumberlink.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/u-s-supreme-court-denies-appeal-of-sex-offender-decision/article_6057d6e8-2e8d-59b2-ba4c-9d4cb053a6b0.html

Attention everyone due relief from Muniz power in numbers, please get on board and join the PARSOL Please contact carol new PARSOL mbcor0305@aol.com they are looking at getting an attorney to advise us or file a class action.

Greetings everyone,

I’m writing to follow-up on last week’s US Supreme Court decision to deny Certiorari (review) in the case of Commonwealth v Muniz. Since I sent out the last email we have had the opportunity to collaborate with the National Association for Rational Sexual Offense Laws (NARSOL) and they are eager to work with us to determine the best course of action. At this time, all agree that it is most prudent to move forward in a manner that is cost-efficient and to employ a legal strategy that will provide relief the greatest number of individuals on the PA registry.

In our desire to get information to you, we now realize that that we (the advocates here in PA) may have been premature in our advice regarding filing a PCRA or a petition for removal. These suggestions might well have the potential to be successful, however, filing your own individual action certainly will not be cost effective, and may actually be counter-productive. As such I’d like to ask each of you to consider holding off on filing while NARSOL works with us to sort this out. In addition to the guidance from NARSOL, it is our understanding that the Pennsylvania Defenders Association and the Pennsylvania Prison Society are also recommending that individual action be delayed for the time being.

Depending on the state’s position regarding how broadly they plan to interpret the court’s opinion, NARSOL is evaluating various legal options which include a class action lawsuit. In addition, NARSOL is planning a conference call in early February which will discuss the options in more detail. You will be informed in advance of the call and the plan is to take questions from the audience.

Best,

Theresa

What exactly does THE acronym PARSOL mean PAUL? Not seeing it when I google it.

I just got off the phone with a very nice girl from the PA Megan’s LAw unit. I expressed my concerns over Muniz and asked if she had received my attorneys letter from last week. She had not.

She explained that they ARE taking people off the registry after each case is reviewed. She said that they have a list. She could not tell me were I fell on the list but insured me that there is a large scale “review” in place.

As a test, before hanging up, I asked “Jennifer, How many people have you removed from the site today?” She responded “Probably a couple dozen”. Take it for what it is worth.

Is anyone able to download the ML website? There is a scammer out there that sells the ML data on a zip drive. I would just like to see the day over day stats to confirm that this is actually happening the way that they are reporting?

I say if any of us get removed we send a nice gift bag to DOBO with a base ball and a copy of article 1 PA constitution each one that way he will have a nice collection

What the heck does tier pending mean on the link posted.

Senate Judiciary chairman Senator Greenleaf called for a hearing on HB 1952. He is the author of the original Megan’s Law bill and he said essentially it was never intended to become what it has. He seems extremely reluctant to pass anything that still violates ex post facto laws, especially for non-violent, non-habitual offenders. For those that missed it, it was also said the the state police are being told to take names off by the Governor’s office. So anything you are hearing about having to pay an attorney thousands of dollars to get off the list even with the Muniz ruling, you are being extorted. As for Senator Greenleaf I am not one of his constituents, but since he is the chair, I felt compelled to write the following to him:

Dear Senator Greenleaf,

I am not one of your direct constituents, but I wanted to address you as head of the judiciary committee overseeing HB 1952. I wanted to thank you for your foresight to not just push the bill through. I also wanted to explain the effect the AWA had on me and thousands of others. In 2003, while on vacation I was arrested and convicted of a non-violent sexual offense. I served two years in federal prison minimum security. After my release, I was placed on PA Megan’s Law registry for 10 years, which should have ended in 2015. However, when the AWA/SORNA went into effect in 2012. I was retroactively increased to 15 years and made to register until 2020 This is clearly a violation of ex post facto law and of constitutional rights. I committed a crime and I served my time for it. I feel that any tier 1 offender, like myself who committed crimes prior to the AWA going into effect who have had only one conviction and who’s original registration should have expired should not have to continue to register. Please do not pass any bill that uses legaleze to get around ex post facto laws and keep everyone on. Or worse yet, give them the right to extend me and others even further. As you eloquently said, the purpose of the registry is to track violent, habitual sex offenders. For those of us that just did something stupid, to extend time on the registry retroactively seems punitive and unconstitutional.

Sincerely and respectfully,

I am off the list as of this afternoon. I spoke with my lawyer this morning and he was informed that the AG was not going to file oposition in my mandamus and I was going to be removed in the next couple of days. They also told him they will be sending him a letter stating I am no longer required to register. It is already happening.

It went down by 4 so far

I highly doubt that PSP will hurry up and take people off. 4000 people is a large number to process so quickly. Paul2 I’m guessing you are right. PSP is taking off those who have court orders to remove. Unless we are wrong and PSP is actually making moves to remove people. We can only hope that they act fast and except the fact that they lost and muniz is law. C’mon PSP take us due relief off. It’s over and long over due.

PSP will slow the roll as best they can even with the Guvnah directing them to do removals. Can’t take the wrong person off the registry so methodical they will be. Court ordered removals will be first in line because they can prove it and don’t want to cross the courts who could penalize PSP if they did cross the courts.

Chris, AJ or anyone, if the court grants the motion to dismiss I can appeal correct? Who do I appeal to and do I state in court for the record that I wish to appeal? I do not believe it will happen but I want to be ready just in case….

If I read it right, there is a public hearing on HB1952 on Monday, February 5 at 10:30 AM.

PA Senate Judiciary Committee met on 1/31/2018. Chairman Stewart Greenleaf requested an expedited hearing on the bill to determine which of the registrants would be taken off the registry and which would stay on. See a video of the hearing at http://www.pasenategop.com/blog/013018-3/.

Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a hearing on HB 1952 for Feb 5, 2018 at 10:30 am, followed by a meeting to consider the bill.

I had been not seeing much of removals. All day refresh the page abs and numbers stay the same. I think they are doing a few each day

NARSOL having a conference call February 7th beginning at 7:00 eastern time on PA v Muniz with details found here:

https://narsol.org/2018/02/narsol-in-action-pa-v-muniz/

Most of your know that my husband had his charges for failure to register under sorna dismissed by the new DA in Cumberland County, per Muniz and his reason for dismissal was he per Muniz he is not to be registered undet SORNA and there is no Megans Law he is not required to register a sex offender.

With that said, Feb 7 2018 he has a hearing in his sentence court from 2006 for his IDSI and he had filed and was granted hearing for enforce his plea, habeas to remove him from SORNA and a mandamus to have him removed completely from the registry.

We will keep you all posted. When he is granted relief per Muniz. He will then proceed to the PSP with his court order.

And we will let you know!

After 11 years and 4 months on the PA Sex Offender Registry, I received the email below. I set up an account with ML and track myself, just to make sure that all my info went in when I registered. But today I was shocked to see that I have been removed!!!!

I promised that I would post the letter that my attorney wrote and I will do that once I return home this weekend. I will also let everyone know that you must also send this to the PSP ML attorney. John Joseph Herman. His email is on the SCOTUS website for the Muniz case.

I think this is a big step insofar that I did not have a court order, just a lawyer that wrote a cease and desist letter. My attorney is Anthony J. Petrone out of Philadelphia and, as I have mentioned, he is the one who got the ball rolling with his victory in Commonwealth of PA Vs. A.S.

Dear M Smith,

The Offender named M SMITH has updated the following information.

Offender Status

Please check the following link for more information. https://www.pameganslaw.state.pa.us/OffenderDetails/PhysDesc/10224

Thank you,
Pennsylvania State Police
Megan’s Law Section

Mike S
Just wandering, did you file a mandamus or did they just pic a number from the hat and your number came up? Just wandering because people are thinking the ones who have a court order are coming off first.

Mike S
Oh and congrats man.

@Paul
The young guy states people are afraid the website will go dark if they don’t pass 1952,
I’m thinking until they get pre SORNA people off the website to avoid being sued due to keeping expired registrants photos online, and yes they can be sued for public shaming if they keep them online after they deny or pass the bill, not permanently blackout the website, this guy is trying the scare tactics to get Greenleaf to just pass the bill without question but Greanleaf isn’t just going to pass this bill.
http://judiciary.pasenategop.com/013018/

My husband just had a thought, he is to receive his ILLEGAL QUARTERLY REPORTING REMINDER PAPER in the mail some time next week. Which has been forcing him to show up with in the 10 day window to report to update or just provide an update photo.

Here is the question, knowing that they are removing PRE SORNA guys from the registry and the fact that my husbands information and anyone else who will be receiving the ILLEGAL paperwork, under SORNA, would the PSP be that stupid to send ANOTHER ILLEGAL FORM knowing that MUNIZ is LAW and it will be an act of BAD FAITH AND CRIMINAL to send the reminder paper?

Here is my husbands take, I bet there are also removing names from the registry that are up for there updates, due to the fact they cant send them the ILLEGAL PAPERWORK anymore forcing them to come done and comply with the UNCONSTITUTIONAL SORNA.

Obviously, PRE SORNA, is what I am talking about.

Anyone have an opinion on this, would it be in the PSP best interests to disobey the law and send the ILLEGAL REPORTING REQUIREMENT to force my husband or others to report for an update that is illegal per MUNIZ now that SCOTUS denied CERT and PSP is removing names?

http://www.buckscountycouriertimes.com/news/20180202/state-to-consider-overhaul-to-sex-offender-registration-law-again

Read this.

Obviously, this House Bill 1952 will take a while to get through the legal stuff.