Commonwealth v. Meals
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Justice CASTILLE.
The issue on appeal is the proper role of an appellate court in reviewing a sentencing court’s classification of a criminal offender as a sexually violent predator (“SVP”) under Megan’s Law II.1 We find that the Superior Court erred in reweighing the SVP evidence presented to the trial court, rather than simply assessing the legal sufficiency of the proof respecting SVP status accepted by the trial court, and further erred in requiring greater proof than is required by the statute. Accordingly, we reverse the order below and reinstate the trial court’s SVP…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MaldonadoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. DavidoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- McMahon v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. DenglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SanchezSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Commonwealth v. RatsamySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Commonwealth v. FeuchtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Commonwealth v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Commonwealth v. PrendesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.