J-S25014-24 

 

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT O.P. 65.37 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 v. 

MICHAEL JONATHAN VELA 

 Appellant 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF 

 PENNSYLVANIA 

 No. 2152 EDA 2023 

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 29, 2023 

In the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County Criminal Division at 

No(s): CP-45-CR-0001136-2021, 

CP-45-CR-0001217-2022 

BEFORE: DUBOW, J., McLAUGHLIN, J., and BECK, J. 

MEMORANDUM BY DUBOW, J.: FILED SEPTEMBER 12, 2024 

 Appellant Michael Jonathan Vela appeals from the judgment of sentence 

entered in the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas following the entry of 

his guilty pleas to one count each of Statutory Sexual Assault, Corruption of 

Minors, and Aggravated Indecent Assault Without Consent.1 He challenges 

the constitutionality of the lifetime registration and notification requirements 

provided in Subchapter H of the Sexual Offenders Registration and Notification 

Act (“SORNA”), 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.11. Based on our Supreme Court’s recent 

analysis in Commonwealth v. Torsilieri, 316 A.3d 77 (Pa. 2024), 

____________________________________________ 

1

 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 3122.1(a)(1), 6301(a)(1)(i), and 3125(a)(1), respectively. 

The Commonwealth charged Appellant with these crimes under two different 

docket numbers. See CP-45-CR-0001136-2021 (Statutory Sexual Assault and 

Corruption of Minors)(“CR—1136-21) and CP-45-CR-0001217-2022 

(Aggravated Indecent Assault without Consent) (“CR-1217-22”). 
J-S25014-24 

- 2 - 

(“Torsilieri II”), we affirm the imposition of the lifetime registration 

requirement based on Appellant’s classification as a Tier III sexual offender 

imposed at docket number CP-45-CR-0001217-2022 (“CR-1217-22”).2

A. 

 We need not provide a detailed recitation of the underlying facts to 

address the issues raised in this appeal. On April 3, 2023, Appellant pled 

guilty to the above offenses. On April 6, 2023, the court scheduled sentencing 

for June 29, 2023, and ordered the Sexual Offenders Assessment Board 

(“SOAB”) to conduct an assessment to determine whether Appellant should 

be classified as a sexually violent predator. 

On June 29, 2023, the court sentenced Appellant at both dockets to an 

aggravated term of 61⁄2 to 13 years’ incarceration.3 In addition, at docket 

____________________________________________ 

2

 Although Appellant listed both docket numbers on his notice of appeal in 

violation of Commonwealth v. Walker, 185 A.3d 969, 977 (Pa. 2018), in 

the interests of judicial economy, we decline to remand for Appellant to file 

separate notices of appeal as suggested by Commonwealth v. Young, 265 

A.3d 462, 477 (Pa. 2021), because the only issue raised in Appellant’s postsentence motion, his Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) Statement, and his appellate brief 

challenges the SORNA registration requirements imposed at docket number 

CR-1217-22 in connection with his conviction for Aggravated Indecent Assault 

without Consent. Appellant raises no issues relevant to docket number CR1136-21. Since Appellant failed to preserve and raise any issues challenging 

the judgment of sentence imposed at CR-1136-21, we affirm that judgment 

of sentence. 

3

 At docket number CR-1217-22, the court imposed a term of 4 to 8 years’ 

incarceration followed by 3 years’ probation. At docket number CR-1136-22, 

the court imposed a term of imprisonment of 18 months to 35 months for the 

Statutory Sexual Assault conviction and a consecutive term of 12 months to 

24 months for Corruption of Minors. The court directed the sentences imposed 

at CR-1136-22 to run consecutive to the sentence imposed at CR-1217-22. 
J-S25014-24 

- 3 - 

number CR-1217-22, the court determined that, pursuant to SORNA, 

Appellant’s Aggravated Indecent Assault conviction automatically rendered 

him a Tier III sexual offender and, thus, subject to SORNA’s lifetime 

registration requirement. 

Appellant filed a post-sentence motion challenging the constitutionality 

of SORNA’s registration requirements provided in Subchapter H. The court 

denied that motion on July 17, 2023. 

Appellant filed a timely appeal and a court-ordered Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) 

Statement. The trial court filed a Rule 1925(a) Opinion. 

B. 

In his brief, Appellant raised the following issues: 

1. Should this Court remand the case because an inadequate 

factual record has been developed and where the 

Commonwealth and the trial court both request remand as 

well? 

2. Does registration under Act 29 violate substantive due process 

under Article 11 of the Pennsylvania Constitution because it 

deprives individuals of the fundamental right to reputation and 

fails to satisfy strict scrutiny? 

3. Does registration under Act 29 deny defendant due process 

under Articles 1 and 11 of the Pennsylvania Constitution 

because it creates an irrebuttable presumption that those 

convicted of enumerated offenses "pose a high risk of 

committing additional sexual offenses" depriving those 

individuals of their fundamental right to reputation? 

4. Does registration under Act 29 deny defendant procedural due 

process under the Pennsylvania and Federal Constitutions 

because it unlawfully impinges the right to reputation without 

notice and an opportunity to be heard? 
J-S25014-24 

- 4 - 

5. Does registration under Act 29 constitute criminal punishment 

and therefore violate the separation of powers doctrine 

because it usurps exclusive judicial adjudicatory and 

sentencing authority? 

6. If registration under Act 29 is punishment, does the imposition 

of mandatory sex offender registration for the instant offense 

constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the 

Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States 

Constitution and Article 1, Section 13 of the Pennsylvania 

Constitution? 

7. If registration under Act 29 is punishment, does it contravene 

the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments of the United States 

Constitution and the corresponding protections of the 

Pennsylvania Constitution because not every fact necessary to 

support the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence must 

be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt? 

Appellant’s Br. at 4-5. 

C. 

Appellant challenges the constitutionality of SORNA’s Subchapter H 

which requires that sexual offenders who commit Aggravated Indecent Assault 

after December 20, 2012, must comply with SORNA’s lifetime registration and 

notification provisions as Tier III offenders. 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9799.14(d)(7), 

9799.11, 9799.23. Appellant presents a pure question of law for which our 

standard of review is de novo and our scope of review plenary. Torsilieri II, 

316 A.3d at 86. 

Appellant acknowledges that “this case presents the same issues that 

were raised in Com[monwealth] v. Torsilieri, 232 A.3d 567 (Pa. 2020).” 

(“Torsilieri I”). Appellant’s Br. at 12. He further acknowledges that, at the 

time he drafted his brief, Torsilieri was pending before the Supreme Court 
J-S25014-24 

- 5 - 

for a second time following that Court’s remand for an evidentiary hearing. 

Id. 

In May 2024, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court issued Torsilieri II, 

finding that SORNA’s subchapter H did not violate the irrebuttable 

presumption doctrine, see 316 A.3d at 91-100, and concluding subchapter H 

was not punitive. Id. at 109-10. The Court further concluded that 

because a finding that [s]ubchapter H constitutes criminal 

punishment is a threshold factor in determining the viability of 

[the] derivative constitutional challenges — that the legislation 

unconstitutionally usurps judicial power over sentencing in 

violation of the separation of powers doctrine, constitutes cruel 

and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, and 

infringes upon the right to a trial by jury by failing to require that 

facts which increase the punishment imposed for the underlying 

crime be found by a reasonable doubt — these constitutional 

claims fail. 

Id. at 110. 

The analysis of Torsilieri II is dispositive of the issues raised by 

Appellant and a remand for an evidentiary hearing is unnecessary. See 316 

A.3d at 97-100 (addressing Subchapter H’s irrebuttable presumption and 

finding it constitutional); 103-110 (analyzing the Mendoza-Martinez factors 

to conclude Subchapter H is non-punitive). See also id. at 109 (observing 

that “Subchapter H includes removal procedures for lifetime registrants”). 

Based on Torsilieri II, we find no error in the court’s application of 

SORNA’s Subchapter H lifetime registration requirements to Appellant 

following his conviction of Aggravated Indecent Assault. This appeal, thus, 

garners no relief. 
J-S25014-24 

- 6 - 

Judgment of sentence imposed at CP-45-CR-0001136-2021 affirmed. 

Judgment of sentence imposed at CP-45-CR-0001217-2022 affirmed. 

Date: 9/12/2024