Commonwealth v. Kale

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 14, 2020 · No. 72 MAP 2020, 73 MAP 2020

Summary

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court granted allocatur limited to whether the Superior Court misconstrued the Pennsylvania State Police's standing under 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.74, contrary to the statute's plain language. All other issues were denied review. The case involves statutory interpretation of PSP's standing in the context of Pennsylvania's sex offender registration framework.

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction
Pennsylvania
Decision date
December 14, 2020
Docket number
72 MAP 2020, 73 MAP 2020
Procedural posture
Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Superior Court order.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Pennsylvania State Police v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Hunter Garrison Kale
Disposition
writ_granted

Topics

appellate procedurestatutory interpretationstandingcriminal procedure

Practice areas

appellate

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Superior Court's Opinion and Order should be reversed because its interpretation of PSP's standing, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.74, is contrary to the plain language set forth in the statute?

Holdings

  1. The petition is granted limited to the stated issue.

Key quotations

AND NOW, this 14th day of December, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: Should the Superior Court’s Opinion and Order be reversed because its interpretation of PSP’s standing, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.74, is contrary to the plain language set forth in the statute?

Factual background

Not applicable; order granting allocatur.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania granted the Pennsylvania State Police's petition for allowance of appeal limited to the issue of statutory interpretation of 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.74 regarding standing.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…