§ 9799.59. Exemption from certain notifications.
(a) General rule.--An individual required to register under section 9799.55(a.1) and (b) (relating to
registration) may be exempt from the requirement to register, the requirement to verify
residence, employment and enrollment in an educational institution, the requirement
to appear on the publicly accessible Internet website maintained by the Pennsylvania
State Police and all other requirements of this subchapter if:
(1) At least 25 years have elapsed prior to filing a petition with the sentencing court
to be exempt from the requirements of this subchapter, during which time the petitioner
has not been convicted in this Commonwealth or any other jurisdiction or foreign country
of an offense punishable by imprisonment of more than one year, or the petitioner's
release from custody following the petitioner's most recent conviction for an offense,
whichever is later.
(2) Upon receipt of a petition filed under paragraph (1), the sentencing court shall enter
an order directing that the petitioner be assessed by the board. Upon receipt from
the court of an order for an assessment under this section, a member of the board
designated by the administrative officer of the board shall conduct an assessment
of the petitioner to determine if the relief sought, if granted, is likely to pose
a threat to the safety of any other persons. The board shall establish standards for
evaluations and for evaluators conducting assessments.
(3) The order for an assessment under this section shall be sent to the administrative
officer of the board within 10 days of the entry. No later than 90 days following
receipt of the order, the board shall submit a written report containing the board's
assessment to the sentencing court, the district attorney and the attorney for the
sexual offender.
(4) Within 120 days of filing the petition under paragraph (1), the sentencing court shall
hold a hearing to determine whether to exempt the petitioner from the application
of any or all of the requirements of this subchapter. The petitioner and the district
attorney shall be given notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be heard, the
right to call witnesses and the right to cross-examine witnesses. The petitioner shall
have the right to counsel and to have a lawyer appointed to represent the petitioner
if the petitioner cannot afford one.
(5) The sentencing court shall exempt the petitioner from application of any or all of
the requirements of this subchapter, at the discretion of the court, only upon a finding
of clear and convincing evidence that exempting the petitioner from a particular requirement
or all of the requirements of this subchapter is not likely to pose a threat to the
safety of any other person.
(6) A court granting relief under this section shall notify the Pennsylvania State Police
in writing within 10 days from the date relief is granted.
(7) The petitioner and the Commonwealth shall have the right to appellate review of the
actions of the sentencing court under this section. An appeal by the Commonwealth
shall stay the order of the sentencing court. A court granting relief under this section
shall notify the Pennsylvania State Police in writing within 10 days from the date
the relief is granted. If a memorandum of understanding has been entered into under
section 9799.61 (relating to victim notification) with respect to relief granted to
the petitioner, the Pennsylvania State Police shall transmit the information about
the relief to the Office of Victim Advocate as soon as is practicable. The Office
of Victim Advocate shall notify the victim of the relief, in accordance with the memorandum
of understanding, as specified in section 9799.61.
(8) The petitioner may file an additional petition with the sentencing court no sooner
than five years from the date of the final determination of a court regarding the
petition and every five years thereafter.
(9) If a petitioner is exempt from any provisions of this subchapter and the petitioner
is subsequently convicted under 18 Pa.C.S. § 4915.2 (relating to failure to comply
with 42 Pa.C.S. Ch. 97 Subch. I registration requirements), relief granted under this
section shall be void, and the petitioner shall automatically and immediately again
be subject to the provisions of this subchapter, as previously determined by this
subchapter.
(b) Agency cooperation.--All State, county and local agencies, offices and entities in this Commonwealth, including
juvenile probation officers, shall cooperate by providing access to records and information
as requested by the board in connection with the court-ordered assessment under subsection
(a).
(June 12, 2018, P.L.140, No.29, eff. imd.)
2018 Amendment. Act 29 reenacted section 9799.59.
Cross References. Section 9799.59 is referred to in sections 9799.58, 9799.61, 9799.63, 9799.74 of this
title; section 4915.2 of Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 2019–2026 · leading case:
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 7× “Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
T.S. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
· cites it 3× “42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). SORNA contained no such provision.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Arnett, R. (Pa. 2026).
· cites it 3× “22 See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59. This section permits a sexual offender to request exemption from SORNA II’s obligation to register with the PSP, verify his or her address, employment, or education status, and to appear on the publicly accessible website.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Witmayer, M. (Pa. 2020).
· cites it 2× “Perhaps the most significant change ushered in by Subchapter I is the addition of a mechanism by which an offender can petition the court to be removed from the sexual offender registry and from its reporting requirements.”
J.B. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 2× “A lifetime registrant may petition with the sentencing court to be removed from the statewide registry if at least 25 years have elapsed prior to filing the petition, “during which time the petitioner has not been convicted in this Commonwealth or any other jurisdiction or…”
R. R. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023).
· cites it 2× “42 Pa. C.S. §9799.59(a)(1). The lifetime registrant must demonstrate by “clear and convincing evidence” that he no longer poses a risk, or a threat of risk, to the public or any individual person.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Witmayer, M. (Pa. 2020).
“The General Assembly removed a plethora of previously qualifying offenses when it enacted Subchapter I, compare 42 Pa.C.S. §9799.59 with 42 Pa.C.S. §§9799.”
M.G. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). Lacombe, slip op.”
Com. v. J., R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa. C.S. § 9799.59(a). Based on these I provisions, the Commonwealth asserts that Act 29 satisfies the analysis done by the United States Supreme Court in evaluating this factor with respect to Alaska's sex offender registration statute in that it imposes no physical…”
R.H. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
“42 Pa.C.S. §9799.59(a)(1)-(5). 9 The Mendoza-Martinez factors are as follows: (1) whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint; (2) whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment; (3) (Footnote continued on next page…) 7 whether Subchapter I of…”
S.S. v. R. Evanchick, Comm. of the PSP (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023).
“Thus, because Petitioner committed sexually violent offenses after April 22, 1996, but before December 20, 2012, and because his lifetime registration requirement under Megan’s Law II had not expired, Petitioner ultimately became subject to the registration and reporting…”
Com. v. McWilliams, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a)(4). We have not found a statute or rule providing for the appointment of counsel in the present circumstances.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a): 6 cases
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
T.S. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). SORNA contained no such provision.”
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Witmayer, M. (Pa. 2020).
“Perhaps the most significant change ushered in by Subchapter I is the addition of a mechanism by which an offender can petition the court to be removed from the sexual offender registry and from its reporting requirements.”
M.G. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). Lacombe, slip op.”
Com. v. J., R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa. C.S. § 9799.59(a). Based on these I provisions, the Commonwealth asserts that Act 29 satisfies the analysis done by the United States Supreme Court in evaluating this factor with respect to Alaska's sex offender registration statute in that it imposes no physical…”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(1): 5 cases
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
T.S. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). SORNA contained no such provision.”
R.H. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021).
“42 Pa.C.S. §9799.59(a)(1)-(5). 9 The Mendoza-Martinez factors are as follows: (1) whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint; (2) whether it has historically been regarded as a punishment; (3) (Footnote continued on next page…) 7 whether Subchapter I of…”
J.B. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022).
“A lifetime registrant may petition with the sentencing court to be removed from the statewide registry if at least 25 years have elapsed prior to filing the petition, “during which time the petitioner has not been convicted in this Commonwealth or any other jurisdiction or…”
R. R. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023).
“42 Pa. C.S. §9799.59(a)(1). The lifetime registrant must demonstrate by “clear and convincing evidence” that he no longer poses a risk, or a threat of risk, to the public or any individual person.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(2): 1 case
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(4): 2 cases
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
Com. v. McWilliams, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).
“See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a)(4). We have not found a statute or rule providing for the appointment of counsel in the present circumstances.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(5): 4 cases
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
T.S. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2020).
“42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a). SORNA contained no such provision.”
J.B. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022).
“A lifetime registrant may petition with the sentencing court to be removed from the statewide registry if at least 25 years have elapsed prior to filing the petition, “during which time the petitioner has not been convicted in this Commonwealth or any other jurisdiction or…”
R. R. v. Psp (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2023).
“42 Pa. C.S. §9799.59(a)(1). The lifetime registrant must demonstrate by “clear and convincing evidence” that he no longer poses a risk, or a threat of risk, to the public or any individual person.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(7): 1 case
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9799.59(a)(8): 1 case
Com. v. Cosby Jr., W., 224 A.3d 372 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).
“Most importantly, Appellant fails to discuss the impact of the addition of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9799.59(a) in SORNA II. Unlike in SORNA I, or in any prior version of Megan’s Law for that matter, Section 9799.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.