Com. v. Spence, J.
1859 MDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Jul 5, 2016Background
- James H. Spence pleaded guilty in Virginia to statutory rape, received 90 days and a 10-year sex-offender registration requirement beginning October 29, 2003.
- After release he moved to York County, Pennsylvania and registered there in December 2003 pursuant to interstate notification.
- In 2013, Pennsylvania reassigned Spence as a Tier 3 offender under SORNA and notified him that his registration period would be lifetime (42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.4), extending the original 10-year term.
- On June 2, 2015 Spence filed a petition to terminate registration, arguing retroactive application of SORNA violated the Ex Post Facto Clause of the U.S. and Pennsylvania Constitutions.
- The trial court held a hearing, took briefs, and denied the petition; Spence appealed to the Superior Court.
- The Superior Court affirmed, following precedent that SORNA is non-punitive for ex post facto purposes and rejecting Spence’s claim; his plea-agreement argument was not developed on appeal and deemed abandoned.
Issues
| Issue | Spence's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retroactive application of SORNA’s lifetime registration violates the Ex Post Facto Clause | Retroactive SORNA effects are punitive, not collateral, so applying it violates the Ex Post Facto Clause | SORNA is civil/nonpunitive by legislative design and, under Mendoza–Martinez factors, its effects are not punitive | Affirmed: SORNA’s retroactive application does not violate the federal Ex Post Facto Clause under controlling Superior Court precedent |
| Whether lifetime registration violated the Virginia plea agreement | Argued SORNA’s lifetime term breached his negotiated 10-year agreement | Commonwealth noted issue not developed on appeal | Court treated plea-agreement argument as abandoned and did not address it |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 (U.S. 2003) (two-step test for ex post facto: legislative intent and whether effects are punitive)
- Commonwealth v. Perez, 97 A.3d 747 (Pa. Super. 2014) (SORNA is nonpunitive under Mendoza–Martinez; retroactive application does not violate federal Ex Post Facto Clause)
- Commonwealth v. Britton, 134 A.3d 83 (Pa. Super. 2016) (summarizes Perez and applies its reasoning)
- Commonwealth v. Prout, 814 A.2d 693 (Pa. Super. 2002) (Superior Court panels are generally bound by prior panel decisions)
- Commonwealth v. Delvalle, 74 A.3d 1081 (Pa. Super. 2013) (undeveloped appellate arguments are waived)