PA: High court will again review sex offender registration
Two years ago, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court shook up long-settled orthodoxy by ruling that the state’s sex offender registration law, otherwise known as SORNA (Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act) was punishment. The case, Commonwealth v. Muniz, 164 A.3d 1189 (Pa. 2018), presented the Court with two questions: whether people who committed their crimes before the adoption of the law could continue to be registered without running afoul of the state Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause, a fairness doctrine that prevents governments from retroactively applying greater punishments to conduct than could have been applied at the time of the crime; and, second, whether the law more broadly violates due process by unfairly labeling a person as sexually dangerous without first proving that fact and without giving the person an opportunity to challenge that message. While the Court answered the first question with a resounding yes, it punted on the second.
The effect of that decision meant that although Pennsylvania was forced to reduce the length of registration for many people who had committed their crimes many years before, or in many cases remove them from the registry altogether, it did little to change how the law would be applied moving forward. SORNA was largely left undisturbed for the roughly 1500 new people added to the registry every year. The due process issue left undecided by the Pennsylvania high court in Muniz is now again before that court, and this time it will be harder to avoid deciding it.
One of the first people to be required to register under the new law was the defendant in Commonwealth v. Torsilieri. Torsilieri was convicted by a jury of a non-consensual sexual offense. He had no prior record, the jury acquitted him of the most serious charges, and according to the trial judge he did not pose a risk of committing other crimes. Yet, SORNA automatically required him to register for the remainder of his life. He is now 27. Not willing to accept that consequence, Torsilieri filed a pre-sentence motion seeking to bar his registration under nine different theories. Specifically, he relied on the Pennsylvania Constitution’s Declaration of Rights, which treats the right to reputation as fundamental and deserving of the same protections our federal constitution affords to life, liberty and property. He also raised other claims under the state and federal constitutions, notably that SORNA is overbroad on its face and therefore cannot be applied to anyone without violating their rights to due process.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
we need someone to step up on a bill for putting vigilanties caught harrassing members of SOR they they as well placed for a period of time shit will change quickly lets go for it
what can we do to ensure a bill on this can work
Unfortunately, Floriduh has no constitutional provision for reputation, thus registered citizens are routinely slandered and maligned by public, press, and police. Although Article 1 of the Floriduh constitution is entitled “Declaration of Rights,” it routinely violates Sections 9 & 10 in “sex crime” cases:
SECTION 9. Due process.—No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against oneself.
SECTION 10. Prohibited laws.—No bill of attainder, ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
Registered citizens live every day in jeopardy due to the same offense. Every time we re-register we are forced to testify against ourselves. There is no due process as more and more punishments are piled on each legislative session. The registry is in itself an ex-post facto law.
“Registered citizens live every day in jeopardy due to the same offense. Every time we re-register we are forced to testify against ourselves. There is no due process as more and more punishments are piled on each legislative session. The registry is in itself an ex-post facto law.”
100% true and appears to be a no-brainier HOWEVER, just try and find an attorney who will take this on in Florida courts. Can’t be done…why is that?
Is it that it is unwinnable in Florida due to the corruption in the legal system there? I think so. If it was winnable some hotshot wanting to make a name for themselves would take it on pro bono as the time invested would be made up 1000 fold with new clients – OR – someone with deep pockets would have already found an attorney and paid for this to be addressed.
Since that has not happened either then one must conclude that it is either unwinnable OR there is simply more money to be made keeping the registry system in place as it is in Florida!
Hope Torsilieri’s attorney has pre-registry data to show SORNA has had no effect whatsoever on the commission of sex crimes. Shouldn’t be surprising considering that a stretch in prison is normally all the rehabilitation a prior sex offender needs. Always has been, always will be.
The first state that strikes down these laws as unconstitutional, is the State that I immediately would move to. I’m getting my conversion van ready.