Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Leidig

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 24, 2008No. 17 MAP 2007PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice McCAFFERY.

We granted review in this matter to consider whether a sexual offender’s plea of nolo contendere is invalid if the trial court fails to inform or misinforms the offender as to the extent of the registration requirements to which he or she is obligated under the act popularly known as Megan’s Law II, Act of May 10, 2000, P.L. 74, as amended, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9791-9799.7. 1 The Superior Court determined that a defendant is not entitled to withdraw a plea if the trial court fails to inform, or even misinforms the defendant regarding the registration requirements of Megan’s…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. State v. WardWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Commonwealth v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  5. Weaver v. Lancaster Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007

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

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. LippertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  2. Ward v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2010
  3. A.S. v. Pennsylvania State PoliceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Commonwealth v. HainesworthSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
  5. Commonwealth v. HaagSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009

47 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