Commonwealth v. Rivera

Summary

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed Jonathan Rivera’s judgment of sentence following his retrial and convictions for sexual offenses involving minors. The court held that the presumption of sentencing vindictiveness was rebutted by objective information available at resentencing, including Rivera’s sexually violent predator designation, victim-impact evidence, and lack of remorse. It also rejected Rivera’s ex post facto challenge to his felony corruption-of-minors sentence because the record supported that at least some conduct occurred after the relevant statutory effective date.

Holdings

1. When the same judge imposes a greater sentence after a new trial, a presumption of vindictiveness applies, but the presumption may be rebutted by objective information or legitimate sentencing concerns not presented to or considered at the original sentencing, including new information concerning the defendant's character and suitability for rehabilitation. The trial court rebutted the presumption here, and the increased sentence did not violate due process.
2. An ex post facto challenge to a sentence is a legality-of-sentence claim and cannot be waived by failure to raise it before the trial court.
3. Sentencing Rivera for corruption of minors as a third-degree felony did not violate the state or federal Ex Post Facto Clauses because the record supported that at least some of the abuse occurred after December 6, 2010, the effective date of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301(a)(1)(ii).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the increased sentence imposed after Rivera's successful appeal and retrial was presumptively vindictive and violated due process.
2. Whether sentencing Rivera for corruption of minors as a third-degree felony violated the state and federal Ex Post Facto Clauses because the charged conduct allegedly occurred before the effective date of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6301(a)(1)(ii).
3. Whether the ex post facto sentencing claim was waived because it was first raised in Rivera's Rule 1925(b) statement.

Disposition

affirmed