Gordon v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
2010 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 685
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2010Background
- Gordon seeks mandamus and injunctive relief to exempt him from Megan's Law registration and related obligations.
- sentencing court failed to provide a notification colloquy and did not order an SOAB assessment under 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9795.3, 9795.4(a).
- After serving his sentence, Gordon was nevertheless contacted by a records office and required to sign Megan's Law registration papers.
- Gordon argues the DOC lacked authority to obtain registration information without a court order and that the Law should not apply due to court omissions and his low risk.
- Respondents contend registration is mandatory for predicate offenses, the court's omissions do not excuse compliance, and DOC/PSP have ministerial duties to enforce the Law.
- The court sustained the respondents' preliminary objections (demurrer) and dismissed Gordon's petition with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Gordon has a right to exemption from Megan's Law. | Gordon contends court omissions void the duty to register. | Registration is mandatory for predicate offenses regardless of court omissions. | No exemption; mandamus/injunction lacking. |
| Whether failure to notify or order an SOAB assessment vitiates registration. | Omissions nullify the duty to register. | Omissions are harmless defects; do not excuse registration. | Omissions do not excuse mandatory registration. |
| Whether DOC/PSP can be compelled to exempt Gordon or halt registration. | DOC/PSP lack authority to enforce without court order; seek exemption. | DOC/PSP have ministerial duties to collect and maintain the registry. | No mandamus or injunctive relief; no statutory basis for exemption. |
| Whether the amendments to Megan's Law constitute ex post facto punishment. | Amendments are punitive and ex post facto. | Registration is remedial and not punitive; amendments fine for public safety. | Amendments not ex post facto; lawful. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Benner, 853 A.2d 1068 (Pa.Super.2004) (colloquy failure not invalidate plea; collateral consequence)
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 787 A.2d 1036 (Pa.Super.2001) (informing in receiving jurisdiction sufficient)
- Commonwealth v. Baird, 856 A.2d 114 (Pa.Super.2004) (trial court must inform offender/SVP of obligations at sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Dengler, 890 A.2d 372 (Pa.2005) (age of victim not controlling for predicate offenses)
- Commonwealth v. Howe, 842 A.2d 436 (Pa.Super.2004) (public safety outweighs burdens; overinclusiveness tolerated)
- Commonwealth v. Lee, 935 A.2d 865 (Pa.2007) (overinclusiveness not dispositive where danger to society)
- Dodgson v. Pa. Dep't of Corr., 922 A.2d 1023 (Pa.Cmwlth.2007) (registration non-punitive; remedial purpose)
- Commonwealth v. Leidig, 956 A.2d 399 (Pa.2008) (public safety rationale for registration)