Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
22 citation events (22 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Com. v. Dyess, M. (pasuperct, 2024-03-11)
Treatment trajectory · 2008 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2008 2017 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Dyess, M.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2024 · confidence medium
The assessment shall include, but not be limited to, an examination of the following: (1) Facts of the current offense, including: (i) Whether the offense involved multiple victims. (ii) Whether the individual exceeded the means necessary to achieve the offense. (iii) The nature of the sexual contact with the victim. (iv) Relationship of the individual to the victim. (v) Age of the victim. (vi) Whether the offense included a display of unusual cruelty by the individual during the commission of the crime. -3- J-S05036-24 (vii) The mental capacity of the victim. (2) Prior offense history, includ…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Zapata, A.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2022 · confidence medium
Under Subchapter I, an SVP is defined in relevant part as a person convicted of a sexually violent offense “who is determined to be a sexually violent predator under [42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9799.58] due to a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses.” 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9799.53.5 Based on the statutory text, the Commonwealth must prove “that the person’s mental abnormality makes the person likely to engage in predatory behavior, whether or not the offense at issue was predatory.” Commonwealth v. Feucht, 955 A.2d 377…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Yant, V.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2017 · confidence medium
A "sexually violent predator" is defined, in pertinent part, as "[a] person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense ... and who is determined to be a sexually violent predator under section [9799.24] (relating to assessments) due to a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses." 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9792; Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776-77 (Pa.Super.2008).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Anderson, J.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2016 · confidence medium
Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 2008 PA Super 74 , 947 A.2d 776,776 (Pa. Super. 2008).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Com. v. Weaver, D.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2015 · confidence medium
Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776-77 (Pa. Super. 2008) (some citations and footnote omitted and some emphasis added) (quoted with approval in Feucht, 955 A.2d at 381 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Commonwealth v. Baker
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2011 · confidence medium
Although the circumstances of the current offense are material to the SVP assessment process, there is no requirement that the instant offense be “predatory.” Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776 (Pa.Super.2008) (citing 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9795.4(b)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Commonwealth v. Feucht
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2008 · confidence medium
Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776 (Pa.Super.2008).
discussed Cited "see" Com. v. Best. J.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776 (Pa. Super. 2008) (explaining that the Commonwealth is only required to demonstrate that the offender “is likely to engage in predatory behavior,” regardless of whether the offense at issue[ ] was predatory itself.).
cited Cited "see" Com. v. Camburn, J.
Pa. Super. Ct. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See Commonwealth v. Fletcher, 947 A.2d 776, 776 (Pa. Super. 2008).
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee
v.
Robert John FLETCHER, Appellant
311 WDA 2007.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
Apr 18, 2008.
947 A.2d 776
David H. Acker, New Castle, for appellant., Kathleen Fee-Baird, Asst. Dist. Atty., New Castle, for the Com., appellee.
Musmanno, Melvin, Colville.
Cited by 12 opinions  |  Published

OPINION BY

COLVILLE, J.:

¶ 1 This is an appeal from the judgment of sentence imposed following Appellant’s guilty pleas to charges related to the sexual abuse of his minor niece, including two counts of indecent assault. Appellant was sentenced and designated a sexually violent predator (“SVP”) for purposes of Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law. Appellant presents argument on only one issue for our review: whether the SVP designation was supported where there was insufficient evidence that Appellant engaged in predatory behavior in the assaults on his niece. When this Court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence supporting a determination of SVP status, “we will reverse the trial court only if the Commonwealth has not presented clear and convincing evidence sufficient to enable the trial court to determine that each element required by the statute has been satisfied.” Commonwealth v. Haughwout, 837 A.2d 480, 484 (Pa.Super.2003) (citation omitted). We affirm.

¶ 2 In the relevant statute, a “sexually violent predator” is defined, in pertinent part, as “[a] person who has been convicted of a sexually violent offense as set forth in [42 Pa.C.S.AJ section 9795.1 (relating to registration) and who is determined to be a sexually violent predator under [42 Pa. C.S.A.] section 9795.4 (relating to assessments) due to a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes the person likely to engage in predatory sexually violent offenses.” 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9792. This definition contains no requirement for a determination that the SVP engaged in predatory behavior in the instant offense. [1][*777] The statutory definition of “predatory,’ about which the arguments before us revolve, is relevant only in that an SYP must be found to have a mental abnormality or personality disorder which renders the SVP likely to engage in predatory behavior. Appellant does not challenge that determination.

¶ B Because Appellant has challenged only one evidentiary insufficiency in his SVP classification, one which is not a requirement thereof, we find no merit to his appeal.

¶ 4 Judgment of sentence affirmed.

1

. The circumstances of the instant offense are material to the SVP assessment process, see 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9795.4(b) (listing "Facts of the current offense” as a mandatory area of inquiry in assessment); there is simply not a requirement that the offense be found to have been "predatory.”