45 A.3d 429
Pa. Super. Ct.2012Background
- Appellee Demmitt was convicted of failing to comply with sexual offender registration under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4915(a)(1) following a January 19, 2008 trial.
- Demmitt had prior sexual offense convictions and was on parole; his parole was later revoked and he was sentenced to prison terms to be served consecutively.
- Megan’s Law required SVPs to register and provide a residence, with specific knowledge and reporting obligations upon release.
- Demmitt, upon release, indicated he could not find a residence and feared being homeless, expressing willingness to be housed in prison.
- Trooper Wakefield arrested Demmitt for lack of a reported residence; Demmitt admitted no residence and stated he would reoffend if released.
- The trial court granted a post-sentence motion for a new trial based on Wilgus I, which held homelessness could excuse noncompliance with residence registration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is homelessness a defense to failing to register a residence under Megan’s Law? | Demmitt; homelessness excuses compliance. | Commonwealth; no homeless exception in Wilgus II. | No; homelessness not a defense; statute interpreted to require registration regardless of housing status. |
| Was it proper to grant a new trial based on Wilgus I? | Demmitt; Wilgus I controls that outcome. | Commonwealth; Wilgus II supersedes Wilgus I and rejects homelessness defense. | No; Wilgus II governs and rejects homelessness exception; new trial improper. |
| What standard governs appellate review of a trial court’s new-trial decision in this context? | N/A | N/A | Abuse of discretion standard applied to trial court’s exercise of new-trial authority; here, error in applying Wilgus I. |
| Does Megan’s Law III affect the residence reporting issue at stake? | N/A | N/A | Legislative amendments clarify residence reporting but do not create a homelessness exception; but the holding relies on Wilgus II. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wilgus, 40 A.3d 1201 (Pa. 2012) (Supreme Court rejects homelessness exception to residence reporting)
- Commonwealth v. Wilgus, 975 A.2d 1183 (Pa. Super. 2009) (Wilgus I—homelessness defense to residence registration)
- Commonwealth v. Yohe, 39 A.3d 381 (Pa. Super. 2012) (reinstates judgment where trial court granted new trial)
- Commonwealth v. Dorm, 971 A.2d 1284 (Pa. Super. 2009) (immemorial right to grant new trial; abuse-of-discretion standard on appeal)