Commonwealth v. Ratushny
17 A.3d 1269
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Appellant Richard A. Ratushny was convicted at trial of aggravated indecent assault, unlawful contact with a minor, endangering the welfare of children, corruption of minors, and indecent assault for sexual abuse of his girlfriend's daughter, T.H.
- A two-part SVP hearing occurred (Aug. 25 and Sept. 11, 2009) resulting in SVP designation subject to Megan's Law lifetime registration.
- Sentencing on Sept. 18, 2009 imposed a total aggregate term of 6 to 17 years, with some counts running consecutively and others concurrently; sentence fell within the aggravated range.
- Appellant filed a timely post-sentence motion; however, a notice of appeal was filed before disposition of the post-sentence motion, with ensuing Rule 1925 considerations.
- Appellant challenged (1) the SVP determination as against the weight of the evidence and (2) the discretionary aspects of his sentence, including mitigating factors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the SVP determination against the weight of the evidence? | Ratushny argues Dr. Dattilio's opinion should control, showing non-SVP status. | Commonwealth's Dickson testified appellant meets SVP criteria and is high risk to re-offend. | Waived on appeal; weight issue requires trial-court motion and is not preserved. |
| Is the sentence excessive given mitigating factors? | Mitigating factors (employment history, lack of prior record, community reputation, family support) warrant a below-guidelines sentence. | No substantial question; court properly weighed factors and complied with law. | No substantial question; discretionary aspects affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Fuentes, 991 A.2d 935 (Pa.Super.2010) (discusses weight-of-the-evidence claims in SVP context (en banc))
- Commonwealth v. Lyons, 833 A.2d 245 (Pa.Super.2003) (role of trial court findings; deference on weight claims)
- Commonwealth v. Griffin, 804 A.2d 1 (Pa.Super.2002) (pre-sentencing reports presumed weighed; weighing factors)
- Commonwealth v. Devers, 519 Pa. 88, 546 A.2d 12 (1988) (pre-sentence considerations; weighting judgments)
- Commonwealth v. Hanson, 856 A.2d 1254 (Pa.Super.2004) (tips on when discretionary-sentence challenges raise substantial questions)
- Commonwealth v. McNabb, 819 A.2d 54 (Pa.Super.2003) (guidance on substantial-question standard)