SCOTUS refuses to hear PA case that found sex offender registry punishment.

The Supreme Court of the United States today denied a petition from the Cumberland County District Attorney’s Office to review a July decision from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that found the state’s current sex offender registration law was punishment and therefore could not be applied retroactively under ex post facto constitutional grounds!

The ruling from the court was brief:

PENNSYLVANIA V. MUNIZ, JOSE M.
The motion of respondent for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Just like the Snyder case out of the 6th Circuit last year, the highest nation in the land has refused to review a case that found the sex offender registry constitutes punishment. This is good news!

Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

43 thoughts on “SCOTUS refuses to hear PA case that found sex offender registry punishment.

  • January 22, 2018

    I haven’t had time to follow this stuff recently, but isn’t this the case that basically said that the registry as it stands is in direct conflict with the state Constitution of Pennsylvania? Great news.

    Reply
    • January 22, 2018

      Yes, and Federal.

      Reply
    • January 22, 2018

      It’s not federal, it went to SCOTUS, it was a state challenge, they couldn’t fight it federally due that Pennsylvania construction has grater protections the the United States constitution, if it was challenged by means of federal we would have lost but it was by means of state law and constitution.

      Reply
      • January 23, 2018

        disagree – the finding of the state court was that it violated the federal constitution and therefore it was unnecessary to see whether it violated the more stringent State constitution

        Reply
        • January 23, 2018

          If it violated federal constitution everyone in the United States would be getting off the registry pre SORNA, freed though Muniz was challenging federal but Muniz was challenging under pa state constitution, I know because I live in pa and have for 20 years, I could be wrong but I don’t think so.

          Reply
          • June 1, 2018

            PA determines that it violates Fed law. Fed law doesn’t agree and refuses to consider the possibility.

            Reply
  • January 22, 2018

    Great news!!!!!!!!

    Reply
  • January 22, 2018

    As a PA resident, and someone to whom the same conditions apply as to Munoz (guilty plea pre-AWA, sentencing post-AWA), what do I do to have my conditions changed to the pre-AWA ones?

    Reply
  • January 22, 2018

    Numerous sources state that most happy people have gratitude embedded in their lives. They recommend being grateful for at least three things daily. This practice, however corny it sounds, has been proven thru studies to work, and for those of us out there dealing with the pressures that accompanying being a registrant, I can attest it has helped me and recommend it highly. It seems you find what you look for in life. And if always look for the dark, the negative, that is what life will feel like for you.

    In my humble opinion, as mentioned before, SCOTUS could have accepted the case and reversed. A catastrophe for us all.

    And so today my three I will be grateful for SCOUTS refusal, for FAC, and for all of you that are being involved!

    Reply
  • January 22, 2018

    This is great news.

    I ” think ” and this is only a thought. SCOTUS is not accepting these cases to hear the constitutionality of the laws right now because they are waiting for the right case to do so. They want more balanced agreements and disagreements ( states that say it’s not punishment and states that say it’s punishment)
    so then when the right case comes along, they can say ok, now we’ll weigh in on this matter and break the knot.

    Until then, I hope more cases from States present themselves as these laws being unconstitutional and punishment. Keep them coming.

    Reply
    • May 12, 2018

      I have a wonderful case and I cannot get an attorney to return my phone call….In 1991 I plead guilty to 1st degree sexual abuse in Kentucky which is a Class C Felony…I did not have to register as a sex offender because my plea predated the Sex Offender Registry. I moved to Tennessee where I did not know I had to register. I was arrested and told not only did I have to register as a sex offender in this state but they said the equivalent of the Kentucky Charge was 1St degree aggravated sexual assault which is a class B Felony. So now I not only have to register for the rest of my life, I have to be held to the standards of a Class B felony instead of a Class C!!!! How can they do this!!

      Reply
      • May 12, 2018

        So this is like a misdemeanor traffic stop being brought up to a leve of a vehicular homicide. Younare convicted of a broken tail loght and pay the fine and move on. Later you go to another state and that burnt bulb somehow turns into a dui multiple homicide.

        Reply
  • January 22, 2018

    Where is FAC as regards filing the ex-post-facto suit. Will it do so this year?

    Reply
    • January 22, 2018

      Yes, please see the recent post. We sent the retainer last month.

      Reply
      • January 23, 2018

        Any word on the identifier case we havent heard about in months?

        Reply
        • January 23, 2018

          No – the judge has not issued an order in the case yet. It has been pending since the end of October.

          Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

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