On August 2, 2002, upon his release from imprisonment, A. registered with PSP as a sex offender as required by Megan's Law II. In early 2007, Gehris's exchanges included requests to meet younger girls 11– to 13–years old that the PSP officer might know and that he fantasized about having sex with the two girls. This Court overruled PSP's preliminary objections to the Petition by memorandum opinion and order filed March 12, 2013.
PSP claims that the language of the former subsection (b)(1) is clear and that A. is subject to its provisions because he is “an individual with two or more convictions of any of the offenses set forth in subsection (a).” PSP asserts that the acts underlying the crimes are of no consequence; if the defendant is convicted of two or more crimes set forth in subsection (a)(1), he or she is a lifetime registrant under subsection (b)(1). If the guilty plea is considered to be one conviction for this purpose, then under that provision, A. is only required to register as a sex offender for ten years under the former subsection (a)(1), but if they are considered to be two convictions, he would be subject to the lifetime registration requirement of the former subsection (b)(1). The female was actually a PSP officer trained to pose as a teenager to collect evidence and investigate sexual predators.
The Pennsylvania State Police, in its capacity under the former Section 9799.1 of the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa. D7.)Disputes over the length of a particular sex offender's registration period have been resolved mostly through the criminal justice system in the courts of common pleas following sentencing, through a right of appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court, and ultimately by discretionary appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court . In that case, Todd Leidig (Leidig) entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge of aggravated indecent sexual assault of his thirteen-year-old stepdaughter. § 3123 (relating to involuntary deviate sexual intercourse).18 Pa. During the conversation, Gehris asked for a picture of the younger girl's breasts and arranged a meeting at a motel approximately 200 miles from his residence with both of the girls to take place on February 19, 2007. On appeal from an unreported Superior Court opinion affirming the trial court's determination, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court considered whether Gehris was subject to the former Section 9795.1(b)(1) lifetime registration requirement due to his guilty pleas to two subsection (a)(1) offenses arising out of a four-month course of conduct that were contained in a single criminal information. In this tiered approach, more serious (primarily violent) offenders and “true” recidivists who squander a given opportunity to reform are understandably subject to lifetime requirements. was charged with other violations but those charges were nolle prossed.6. About ten days later, Gehris called a number that he had been given and spoke with the PSP officer posing as the 19–year–old and another officer posing as a 13–year–old girl. Because Gehris was guilty of both the criminal solicitation for the sexual exploitation of children and criminal solicitation for the sexual abuse of children, the trial court found that he was subject to the lifetime registration requirement of the former Section 9795.1(b)(1) of the Sentencing Code. It is evident that in drafting Section 9795.1, the General Assembly meant to set up a graduated registration scheme. 2/28/02” refers to the transcript of the trial court's February 28, 2002 sentencing hearing.7. In so doing, Justice Todd adopted a similar statutory-construction approach to that followed by the Superior Court in Merolla. contends that though he pled guilty to two predicate offenses under Section 9795.1(a)(1) of the Sentencing Code, he actually committed only one criminal act that just happened to meet the elements of both predicate offenses. Gehris pled guilty to solicitation for the sexual exploitation of children (18 Pa. If, however, an individual engaged in a variety of activities as part of a criminal episode, he could violate both Sections 63 based upon the different activities in which he engaged. Gehris solicited and obtained from an undercover state police officer nude photographs of what Gehris thought to be a thirteen-year-girl in violation of Section 6312. As part of that analysis, we must presume that the General Assembly, in crafting legislation, “does not intend a result that is absurd, impossible of execution or unreasonable.” Id. Based on the legislative findings and declaration of policy in Megan's Law II, and our Supreme Court's decision in Leidig, we know that the General Assembly's paramount concern in passing Megan's Law II, particularly the registration component of the law, was “to protect the safety and general welfare of the people of this Commonwealth.” 42 Pa. Under Section 9795.1(b)(1), “[a]n individual with two or more convictions of any of the offenses set forth in subsection (a),” must register for a lifetime. 1532(b) is generally the same as a motion for peremptory judgment filed in a mandamus action in the common pleas court. She also observed: Although the overall structure of Section 9795.1 conditions its registration scheme, in part, on the nature of particular sexual offenses, since lifetime registration is required of those who commit the arguably more serious offenses enumerated in Section 9795 .1(b)(2), I find it significant that the legislature also chose to impose the very same lifetime registration requirement for those convicted of two or more of any of the offenses enumerated in Section 9795.1(a)(1), the vast majority of which are offenses against children. But that, in the Chief Justice's view, does not necessarily address the problem: The problem confronted in this appeal arises when subsection (b)(1) is applied to an offender who has committed “two or more” subsection (a) offenses during the course of a single continuous criminal episode or course of conduct. 5), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted the Petition for Allowance of Appeal of Adam Mielnicki (Mielnicki) from a June 13, 2012, unreported memorandum decision of a three-judge panel of the Superior Court (No. § 6312), relating to possession of child pornography. S.'s second theory, not addressed by the majority, is that the legislature could not have intended that the difference between ten-year registration and lifetime registration is dependent solely on the number of convictions (a matter of plea negotiation and/or prosecutorial discretion) where the offender actually engaged in only a single act of criminal misconduct. Gehris also arranged with the undercover officer for Gehris to meet the thirteen-year-old girl in a hotel room for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity with her in violation of Section 6320. The General Assembly, therefore, must have reasoned that those offenders whom it intended to fall under Section 9795.1(b)(1) are offenders who pose a greater risk to public safety than those who would otherwise be ten-year registrants. Cmwlth.2011) (“We will treat the cross-motions as cross-applications for summary relief pursuant to Rule 1532(b) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure. The application will be granted where the right to such relief is clear, but will be denied where there are material issues of fact in dispute or if it is not clear the applicant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”) (citation omitted).3.