Commonwealth v. Brooks, C., Pet

177 A.3d 822
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 3, 2018·No. 434 WAL 2015·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3rd day of January, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:

1. Is it unconstitutional to require [Petitioner]' to register for a lifetime when said registration requirement exceeds the statutory maximum penalty for [Petitioner’s] offense?
2. Is the Adam Walsh Statute unconstitutional in requiring the [Petitioner] to register for a lifetime?

The judgment of sentence'is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court for reconsideration in light of Commonwealth v. Muniz, — Pa. -, 164 A.3d 1189 (2017).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Commonwealth v. Brooks, C., Pet, 177 A.3d 822 (Pa. 2018).

177 A.3d 822 (Commonwealth v. Brooks, C., Pet) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Com. v. Scott, R.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2019