Commonwealth v. McDonough
96 A.3d 1067
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- McDonough convicted byjury of indecent assault (second-degree misdemeanor) and sentenced to 1–2 years’ imprisonment plus 15-year SORNA sex-offender registration.
- Victim relationship with McDonough was long-standing; they had two children and allegedly were not in a current relationship at the time of the incident.
- Alleged August 29, 2012 incident involved finger insertion, oral sex, and intercourse without consent; victim testified she repeatedly told McDonough “no.”
- McDonough admitted lack of consent in pre-arrest police statement but testified at trial that the victim consented; jury credited the victim over McDonough.
- The trial court classified McDonough as a Tier I offender under SORNA, requiring 15 years of registration, and denied relief on challenges to SORNA’s constitutionality.
- Court affirmed judgment of sentence and held SORNA’s registration provisions constitutional as remedial, non-punitive measures intended to promote public safety.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence on lack of consent | McDonough argues the victim consented. | Commonwealth contends victim’s lack of consent was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. | Evidence supports lack of consent; jury credibility determination resolved issue in Commonwealth’s favor. |
| Constitutionality/duration of SORNA registration | 15-year registration for a Tier I offense exceeds the crime’s maximum penalty and is excessive. | Registration is remedial, not punitive, and tied to public safety objectives. | SORNA registration upheld as non-punitive collateral consequence; duration appropriate under governing standards. |
| Non-punitive nature of SORNA and derivation from Megan's Law; applicability to McDonough | Registration mechanics remain valid as a remedial measure. | Predecessor and current statutes support remedial purpose; penalties for non-compliance are not imposed as criminal punishment. | Registration provisions constitutional as applied; statutory remedial purpose sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Randall, 758 A.2d 669 (Pa.Super.2000) (sufficiency of evidence standard; verdict winner view of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Charlton, 902 A.2d 554 (Pa.Super.2006) (unambiguous absence of consent as element; uncorroborated testimony sufficient)
- Commonwealth v. Gooding, 818 A.2d 546 (Pa.Super.2003) (jury credibility determinations allowed on consent issue)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 832 A.2d 962 (Pa.2003) (Megan’s Law II; registration provisions deemed remedial, not punitive (SVP context))