Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Hainesworth

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 12, 2013PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOpinion By Bender, P.J.

Appellant, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, appeals from an order entered on December 19, 2012, by the Honorable John Blahovec of the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County. That order states that Appellee, Deono Terrell Hainesworth, is not required to register as a sex offender under Act 111 of 2011, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.10, et seq., also known as the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). The Commonwealth contends that the trial court erred in determining that Hainesworth is not subject to the registration requirements of SORNA. After careful review, we conclude that…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Missouri v. FryeSupreme Court of the United States · 2012
  3. Commonwealth v. ZuberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Commonwealth v. LeidigSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  5. Commonwealth v. KrohSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LippertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Shower, W.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. Commonwealth v. ParteeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Commonwealth v. BundySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  5. Commonwealth v. OliverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015

86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API