Commonwealth v. Whanger
30 A.3d 1212
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Appellant Thomas Whanger appeals an SVP designation under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9795.4.
- Whanger pled guilty to multiple sex offenses and was sentenced in May 2009.
- Before sentencing, Whanger signed a form acknowledging the SVP pre-sentence requirement but waived it.
- SOAB later assessed Whanger, and in February 2010 the court held an SVP hearing resulting in designation.
- Whanger did not object at the time, nor did he pursue post-sentence relief; the Commonwealth asserts waiver of timing issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver of pre-sentence SVP timing | Whanger argues statute requires pre-sentence SVP assessment and cannot be waived. | Whanger effectively waived the timing requirement; waiver is enforceable. | Waiver valid; timing challenge foreclosed |
| Jurisdiction to enter post-sentencing SVP order | Court lacked authority to designate SVP nine months after sentencing. | SVP status is a collateral consequence, not a sentence modification; court retained power. | SVP determination is collateral; court had jurisdiction to issue SVP order |
| Subject matter jurisdiction limitations under 30-day modification rule | Section 5505 limits post-judgment modifications; SVP order after sentencing violates this. | SVP status is collateral and does not modify sentence; 5505 not applicable | Section 5505 does not bar post-sentencing SVP proceedings |
| Sufficiency of evidence to support SVP designation | Evidence does not establish mental abnormality or predatory risk. | Record contains clear and convincing evidence of pedophilia and predatory risk under Megan's Law factors. | Evidence sufficient to support SVP designation |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Mallory, 596 Pa. 172 (Pa. 2008) (waiver of rights and sequencing generally permissible)
- Commonwealth v. Byrne, 833 A.2d 729 (Pa. Super. 2003) (waiver of rights and statute sequencing)
- Commonwealth v. Baird, 856 A.2d 114 (Pa. Super. 2004) (SVP assessment before sentencing; preservation of claims)
- Commonwealth v. Leidig, 598 Pa. 211 (Pa. 2008) (SVP hearing post-conviction; collateral determination)
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 593 Pa. 295 (Pa. 2007) (subject matter jurisdiction distinctions in criminal matters)
- Commonwealth v. Harris, 972 A.2d 1196 (Pa. Super. 2009) (SVP hearing timing post-sentencing; jurisdictional nuances)
- Commonwealth v. Askew, 907 A.2d 624 (Pa. Super. 2006) (Megan's Law factor application and SVP standards)
- Commonwealth v. Krouse, 799 A.2d 835 (Pa. Super. 2002) (requirements for SVP status framework)
- Commonwealth v. Shugars, 895 A.2d 1270 (Pa. Super. 2006) (court may consider SVP status in sentencing)