Com. v. Campbell, C. ( 2018 )

J-S49025-18
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
CODY LEE CAMPBELL
Appellant No. 96 MDA 2018
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered March 20, 2017
In the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming County
Criminal Division at No.: CP-41-CR-0000382-2017
BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., STABILE, J., and STEVENS, P.J.E.*
MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 30, 2018
Appellant Cody Lee Campbell appeals from the March 20, 2017
judgment of sentence entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Lycoming
County (“trial court”), following his guilty plea to one count of failure to comply
with registration requirements under the Sexual Offender Registration and
Notification Act (“SORNA”), 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4915.1(a)(1). Upon review, we
vacate and remand.
The facts and procedural history of this case are undisputed. Briefly, on
December 10, 2012, Appellant pleaded nolo contendere to indecent assault of
a minor. At the time Appellant entered into the guilty plea, he was not subject
to any reporting requirements. Nonetheless, ten days later, on December 20
2012, SORNA became effective. Applying SORNA, Appellant was subjected to
____________________________________________
* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S49025-18
a fifteen-year registration requirement. On March 17, 2017, Appellant was
charged with one count of failure to comply with registration requirements
under SORNA. On March 20, 2017, Appellant pleaded guilty and the trial court
sentenced him to fourteen to thirty-six months’ imprisonment. Appellant did
not file a direct appeal.
On September 15, 2017, Appellant filed a petition under the Post
Conviction Relief Act (“PCRA”), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 9541-46, challenging his
sentence in light of Commonwealth v. Muniz, 164 A.3d 1189 (Pa. 2017).
The PCRA court appointed counsel, who filed an amended petition, seeking,
inter alia, the reinstatement of Appellant’s direct appeal rights nunc pro tunc.
On November 6, 2017, the PCRA court reinstated Appellant’s direct appeal
rights. Appellant timely appealed to this Court. Both Appellant and the trial
court complied with Pa.R.A.P. 1925.
On appeal, Appellant argues, and the trial court agrees, that his
sentence is illegal under Muniz, wherein our Supreme Court held that the
reporting and registration requirements under SORNA are punitive and that
their retroactive application to offenses committed prior to SORNA’s
enactment (December 20, 2011) and effective dates (December 20, 2012)
violates the ex post facto clause of the United States Constitution. The Muniz
Court considered whether SORNA was unconstitutional as applied to a
defendant subjected to an increased registration period under SORNA. Id. at
1192-93. Muniz was convicted of indecent assault in 2007 and subject to a
ten-year registration requirement pursuant to then-extant Megan’s Law III
-2-
J-S49025-18
(42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9795.1 et seq. (expired)). Id. at 1193. Muniz absconded
prior to sentencing. In 2014, he was apprehended, sentenced, and subjected
to a lifetime reporting requirement under SONRA. Id. In summary, our
Supreme Court concluded that SORNA’s notification and registration
requirements were punitive rather than civil, and that SORNA was
unconstitutional as applied to Muniz because it increased the punishment for
indecent assault after he committed the offense.
The instant case is similar to Muniz. When Appellant committed the
underlying indecent assault offense in 2009, he was not subject to any
reporting requirement and SORNA had not yet become enacted, much less
become effective. Thus, as stated and consistent with Muniz, the retroactive
application of SORNA to Appellant’s underlying offense, which occurred prior
to SORNA’s enactment and effective dates, is unconstitutional. As a result,
Appellant had no duty register under SORNA.
Judgment of sentence vacated. Case remanded. Jurisdiction
relinquished.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 11/30/2018
-3-