PA: Megan’s Law hearing canceled

Source: altoonamirror.com 5/12/23

HOLLIDAYSBURG — Blair County Senior Judge Timothy M. Sullivan won’t be hearing arguments today on the constitutionality of the state’s law requiring sex offenders to regularly register their addresses and other information with state police.

Because the state Supreme Court is taking up the constitutional issue on May 23 when it reviews a Chester County case, today’s hearing before Sullivan was canceled.

Decisions by the state Supreme Court, expected after the May 23 arguments in Commonwealth v. Torsilieri, are likely to be influential on Blair County cases.

Attorneys representing George J. Torsilieri, a convicted sex offender, are attempting to get the state high court to affirm a decision by a Chester County judge who found the state’s Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act to be unconstitutional.

In pursuit of that ruling, Torsilieri’s defense attorneys presented experts who described the law as unfairly broad because it sets registration requirements for sex offenders like Torsilieri who showed little risk of reoffending.

In anticipation of the May 23 hearing before the state Supreme Court, several non-party organizations have filed briefs to comment on the issue.

Read the full article

 

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.  
 

22 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Is this good news or bad news?

Watch them just claim “ oh it’s civil so it’s constitutional. I mean look how they let all these “experts” file briefs about how dangerous we are. 🙄 I truly feel as it will never end 😔

He may succeed, but only if his lawyers aim directly at the foundation of the regime. In short, “fairness” will not win the day.

I wish Torsilieri’s case much luck! May the winds of good fortune go your way!

So after listening to this for a refresher 
https://www.registrymatters.co/podcast/rm236-pa-handed-crushing-defeat-in-torsilieri-case/
   I feel cautiously optimistic for this case. Feel like we have the ball and are on offense we won the court cases in this matter and the state keeps appealing the decision so that’s a plus. 
    Also right now this ruling only affects Blair County Pennsylvania but a win will I believe will have all Pennsylvania people eligible to challenge their reputation defense. 
   So I know I’m putting the cart before the horse but if that happens then the few states that list reputation as a liberty ( supposedly a handful couldn’t find any) can use this as case precedent. 
   Also there is 25k registered citizens in Pennsylvania who could potentially be asking to turn in their price mart membership this might get the Supreme Court attention if we win here. 

will this site be uploading the oral arguments?

⚖️🏛️ PA Supreme Court hearing is on Tuesday! ⏳👍🏻
‘Hoping the PA Justices will channel the State’s Quaker founders and make the Keystone State proud!😃

9:30 seems like when oral arguments will begin https://m.youtube.com/live/3xB9LwPC7EI

9:30 a m tomorrow …. I’m looking forward to a very interesting hearing. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻😃

anyone listening?

8:05 a.m. PCT: The PASC Torselieri arguments have just concluded. And, as the justices themselves stated, they were good arguments presented by counsel. (I would assume they mean both counsel.)

So now we wait for that ruling…. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Ok so from what I could tell defense was only kept saying high 20% recidivism rate and it’s a legislative issue.

Our lawyer seemed well advised with our issues but mainly was bombarded with what happens with felon and gun rights, if you win. One of the judges mentioned what happens when the consensus change using Galileo as an example tho i could be potentially reading to much into that.

Seems there trying to see how they can unwind this law with out opening a can of worm with other people using this case as precedent.

One of the judges seem to struggle with striking the law vs individual assessments at one point so that could be a compromise. They also question why they used right to reputation.

I read somewhere they will announce their decisions in the fall around November

Last edited 1 year ago by Eugene V Debs

Recording can be found on this ACSOL post:
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Oral Arguments – Tuesday, May 23, 2023

we are the first case on it. The state is talking first.