Summary
reversing and remanding an en banc decision of this Court on the same grounds, i.e., that Subchapter I of SORNA II does not constitute punishment and is not an ex post facto law, even as applied to an offender who committed his triggering offenses before any sex offender registration scheme existed
Summary of this case from Huu Cao v. The Pa. State Police of the CommonwealthOpinion
No. 44 MAP 2020 No. 47 MAP 2020
06-22-2021
B.W., Appellee v. PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE, Appellant B.W., Cross Appellant v. Pennsylvania State Police, Appellee
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 22nd day of June, 2021, the order of the Commonwealth Court is REVERSED and the matter is REMANDED to that court for consideration of remaining unaddressed claims. See Commonwealth v. Lacombe , ––– Pa. ––––, 234 A.3d 602 (2020) (holding Subchapter I of Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9799.51 - 9799.75, does not constitute criminal punishment and therefore does not violate constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws). See also Commonwealth v. Butler , ––– Pa. ––––, 226 A.3d 972, 993 (2020) (court on remand to consider remaining claims not addressed). The Motion to Strike Portions of Designated-Appellant's Brief and the Application for Oral Argument are DENIED . The Motion to Seal Designated-Appellee's Previously Filed Motion to Strike Portions of Designated-Appellant's Brief is GRANTED .