WEST CHESTER >> A Common Pleas Court judge has ruled that a West Goshen man convicted of forcing himself sexually on a sleeping woman will not have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
In an order signed July 10, Judge Anthony Sarcione found that the law that defendant ____ ____ was required to report to state police as a sex offender was unconstitutional. He said the law, the Sexual Offenders Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), violated the fundamental right to reputation under the state Constitution, as well as federal guarantees of due process. Full Article
The F…..
Its that simple??? What now?
❤ Oh, how I love the Quaker State!! ❤ These rulings certainly show a promising pattern!! Please let Pennsylvania be the first domino to fall!! And as for the prosecution: “First Assistant District Attorney Michael Noone said Monday that his office had filed a notice of appeal of Sarcione’s decision on the constitutionality of the SORNA provisions.”– Hello D.A.! Your own Pennsylvania Supreme Court already declared it State and Federally unConstitutional!!
WOW!!! This is HUGE!!
I do hope this is challenged and eventually leads all the way back to SCOTUS where they can correct their error from 15 years ago and just kill this whole damn thing! If there’s hope like this for a man who essentially raped his victim, there’s hope for many of us serving this life sentence for much lesser crimes.
God bless this judge, from the bottom of my heart!!!! Thank you sir. I’ve been registering for 20 years and its absolutely horrible. Thank you sir, Thank you.
And to think only a year ago Janice was so pessimistic. The fact is the registry is just fascist and therefore evil. Not only is it punishment, the punishment does not fit the severity of the crime as applied to most people.
Well……I’m not exactly happy to see that a rapist gets to leave this mess and many of us that just made a stupid ass decision 20 yrs ago are still held at gun point. But hey……this looks like real progress….maybe……I guess.
CA could use a Judge like this one.
Wow more good news. Just keep fighting people, this shits gotten real now!!!!
He was convicted in 2015 after sorna went into effect, wow so sorna after 2012 can be beaten…
Well, Pennsylvania gets it, that’s for sure! I wonder if the judiciary in Pennsylvania can take over the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals? It’s as if PA and the 7th Circuit exist in two separate dimensions or something.
Hey, 7th Circuit, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE, you jackasses!!!!!
ReadyToFight
I’m in the same boat I assume as you are, had a consensual relationship back in 1997 the state picked up the charges and still paying for it for it sense 03 seeing that Colorado had no Megan’s law till 2002 , so I wasn’t required to register till 03 in pa, progress is progress, recidivism is key here though, the people that need to be focused on are SO’s that have the inability to stop mentally, ones beyond help, counciling and medication, who knows, I’m not here to judge though, rape is beyond wrong but so is selling a bag of bad heroine to a 14 year old, or pulling a drive by and killing a 2 year old, I always said , if your that desperate get a prostitute, no reason for that though. People like that can be monitored but this public hate list isn’t the answer because you get people with low level offenses stuck on it for life,also our families suffer for it as well, couple years ago my wife was almost run off the road intentionally by my neighbor and the police wouldn’t do anything about it and the guy admitted it to.
Very impressive, would like to get Janice’s thoughts and comments about this positive development.
Does anyone know where to find the written opinion?
AJ,Chris and all others take note “violated the fundamental right to reputation under the state Constitution,” love it…… All over the country it has begun…..If anyone has the actual decision, AJ because you always come up with the links, lol I would love to read this….
Why is he still listed on the registry?
Act 10 SORNA DONE
The DA did appeal the ruling
On a parallel thought, in 1958 the CA courts in Kelly v Municipal stated that “compulsory police reporting” was criminal/quasi-criminal in nature and registration should not continue once a person has successfully completed probation. In 2003 Doe v Smith decision, Chief Justice also stated that in-person reporting wasn’t required and thus not considered punishment/disability as reporting was via the mail.
Now, being on the registry also includes being on the a background check. If you’re denied a job because of the registry, then the registry is now criminal in nature. If you have a 1203.4 (expungement for successfully completing probation) and you’re denied a job due to the registry, then the registry has concrete disability. The fact that most places stated “if you were convicted of a sex crime…”, but the 1203.4 legally states your crime never happened b/c it was dismissed, then how do you still belong to a registry program that’s only for convicted sex offenses?
Anyhow, summer school has kept me busy and I still want to have a suit against California for keeping on the registry beyond the stated time upon my probationary period.
Ca Constitution: SEC. 9. A bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing
the obligation of contracts may not be passed.
Kelly v Municipal passed law that stated compulsory in-person police reporting was criminal in nature as well as 290 cannot supersede 1203.4. You’re only on the registry for the time of your probation because that’s the only time you’re convicted.
PC290.007: Any person required to register pursuant to any provision of the Act shall register in accordance with the Act, regardless of whether the person s conviction has been dismissed pursuant to Section 1203.4, unless the person obtains a certificate of rehabilitation and is entitled to relief from registration pursuant to Section 290.5.
Regardless means acknowledgement and ignoring the obligations of a contract set forth by the DA, Judge, and defendant when probation was levied and if the defendant qualified for 1203.4.
…
I keep reiterating this process: use the constitution to beat down parts of the registry. That’s what I got from the Maryland lawyer who beat down parts of the registry!
and then there was one. Years ago, no one would have dreamed of getting a ruling like this. Muniz was the ruling that broke the dam. It gave lower courts permission to not follow the status quo.
I think the Muniz case was for the better in my opinion, that just made a big statement saying that the constitution was put in place for a reason, not only for certain people or when they feel like enforcing the constitution, it’s like only certain people in society have constitutional rights and the other doesn’t. I’m sure if they charged a drug dealer with a crime and after he was sentenced they slapped 5 more charges on just because, they would have no problem and probably even rule it unconstitutional literally over nite, in our case they take decades for the courts to decide it’s unconstitutional and once they do they just invent a new law and apply it within days.