PA- Court suggests lawmakers address Megan's Law loophole for homeless

The journalist claims, in two cases of homeless offenders where neither while homeless committed any offense whatsoever, were charged with failure to register and the courts holding that, due to the wording of the law they did not have to register. It seems to be that the legislature's silence screams that there is no public safety issue under these circumstances and therefore no change is warranted. That apparently goes against the grain of judges and this journalist, so why do something for the sake of doing something that is not needed? Too many people are stuck in the "I need to control" mode which is apparent here!

7-5-2009 Pennsylvania:

Six years ago, a panel of Pennsylvania Superior Court justices ruling on a York County case cautioned the state legislature of an apparent hole in Megan's Law -- a hole allowing homeless defendants to wander away from the requirement to register where they were living.

Last month, a different three-justice panel from the same court, ruling on a different case and reaching a different conclusion, suggested the legislature address the same shortcoming.

Both cases involved men convicted of sex crimes who had been released from prison and were each unable to find a residence.

In York County, Michael Lee Rozankowski was tried in 2002 for failing to register his residence with state police. He was convicted in a bench trial and sentenced to one to two years in prison.

He appealed with the argument that at the time of his arrest, he had no residence to register with the police. The Superior Court affirmed the verdict, stating Rozankowski's argument "rings hollow."

"We do not decide whether the Pennsylvania registration statute provides an adequate means for homeless individuals to register their whereabouts, because we do not reach that issue in this case," the court said in Rozankowski's appeal.
In Dauphin County, William H. Wilgus was tried in 2008 for failing to register his residence with state police.

He was convicted in a bench trial. But before sentencing, the trial judge granted a defense motion, set aside the verdict and dismissed the charges.

Wilgus's post-trial argument, which resulted in the arrest of judgment, was that he had no "residence" to register with the police.

The commonwealth appealed, and the Superior Court affirmed the arrest of judgment last month.

"Because Wilgus's homeless existence precluded the possibility of a residence . . . we're constrained to hold Wilgus was without a 'residence' to register, change or verify within the meaning of Pennsylvania's Megan's Law," the court said in the Wilgus case.

"The legislature may well consider amending the statute to address the status of homeless offenders within the registration requirements of Megan's Law."

The Dauphin County District Attorney's Office intends to appeal that ruling to the state Supreme Court, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Sean McCormick said.

The difference in the two cases are:

--- York County Judge Michael J. Brillhart convicted Rozankowski of not notifying state police that he left his last "residence" regardless that he had no new definite residence to register.

--- Dauphin County Judge Scott A. Evans found that Wilgus did not have a "residence" to register and therefore did not violate Megan's Law.

Nils Frederiksen, spokesman for Attorney General Tom Corbett, said the Attorney General's Office is "closely watching" the Wilgus case but at this point has no standing in it.

State Rep. Stan Saylor, R-Windsor Township, said the case exposed an issue that needs to be addressed if Megan's Law is to continue and be effective.

He isn't sure of the solution, but said he will ask the state's legal experts to examine what can be done within the constitution. Once the state budget is passed, he said, fixing the law should become a priority.

"There needs to be some corrective legislation to monitor those who are homeless," Saylor said.

Former state Rep. Bev Mackereth, R-Spring Grove, now executive director of York County human services, was active in the legislation of Pennsylvania's Megan's Law. She said legislators discussed whether more sex offenders would become homeless because of the limitations of where they can reside and the ready availability of information about where they do reside.

"Really, nobody wants them living in their neighborhoods," Mackereth said.

She explained the lawmakers determined public safety was more important than the "interest of the individual" offender. That is, although a Megan's Law registrant may be harassed out of a neighborhood, the legislature felt overall the public should have knowledge of where sex offenders live.

"We may have created this ourselves," Mackereth said. "We discussed whether there would be more homeless offenders. We never considered the problem of registering an address. I don't remember that coming up." ..Source.. by RICK LEE, Daily Record/Sunday News