Commonwealth v. Moreno
14 A.3d 133
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Moreno, a lifetime Megan's Law registrant based on a 1991 rape conviction, was paroled in 2001 and informed of registration requirements.
- He was reincarcerated in May 2008 for drug paraphernalia charges and released July 24, 2008.
- On July 25, 2008 Moreno listed 585 West Princess Street as his address on the Megan's Law registration worksheet; PSP records show no further address changes since July 2008.
- An October 29, 2008 intake showed Moreno's address as 585 West Princess; mail to that address was later returned as 'temporarily away'; J-NET listed 583 West Princess as his address of record.
- Moreno was arrested January 3, 2009 on an unrelated warrant; he later provided an address of 585 West Princess, though he admitted not actually living there and described transient sleeping arrangements.
- In September 2009 Moreno was convicted of violating 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4915(a)(3) for knowingly providing inaccurate information when registering under Megan's Law; he was sentenced to four to eight years' imprisonment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the conviction supported by sufficient/weight of the evidence given Moreno's homelessness? | Moreno contends Wilgus homelessness exception undermines guilt. | Commonwealth argues Wilgus is distinguishable; Moreno knowingly provided false information. | Evidence sufficient; Wilgus distinguished; conviction affirmed. |
| Did the Commonwealth prove Moreno did not reside at 585 West Princess Street on July 25, 2008? | Moreno asserts he resided there; effectively homeless elsewhere. | Moreno did not reside there; he slept on porches/streets and was transient. | Yes; Moreno was not residing there, supporting the conviction. |
| Did the trial court err by shifting burden to Moreno by treating homelessness as an affirmative defense? | Moreno argues homelessness is an affirmative defense burden-shift. | Homelessness is not a defense; misrepresenting address violates § 4915(a)(3). | No error; homelessness not a defense; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Wilgus, 605 Pa. 313, 989 A.2d 340 (Pa. 2010) (addressing homelessness and residence under Megan's Law; Wilgus distinguished)
- Commonwealth v. Champney, 574 Pa. 435, 832 A.2d 403 (Pa. 2003) (weight of the evidence standard and appellate review limits)
- Commonwealth v. Hodge, 441 Pa.Super. 653, 658 A.2d 386 (Pa. Super. 1995) (weight of the evidence and new-trial principles)
- Commonwealth v. Bennett, 827 A.2d 469 (Pa. Super. 2003) (general propositions on sufficiency and weight of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Chmiel, 536 Pa. 244, 639 A.2d 9 (Pa. 1994) (circumstantial evidence sufficiency standard)
- Commonwealth v. Swerdlow, 431 Pa.Super. 453, 636 A.2d 1173 (Pa. Super. 1994) (appellate review of circumstantial evidence)
- Commonwealth v. DiStefano, 782 A.2d 574 (Pa. Super. 2001) (probative value and reasonable-doubt standard in circumstantial cases)