The Pennsylvania Superior Court on Thursday rejected attempts by a former Penn State Altoona student to challenge his lengthy prison sentence for the sexual abuse of several underage girls.

The appeals court, in its review of the case against 27-year-old Jeffrey Guo, a Philadelphia native, also rebuked a challenge to the constitutionality of Guo’s classification as a sexually violent predator, which will require him to register with police and undergo counseling for the rest of his life.

Guo presently is incarcerated in the State Correctional Institution in Fayette County, where he is serving a sentence of 23.5 years to 64 years.

The sentence was imposed 19 months ago by Blair County President Judge Wade A. Kagarise, who was faced with a request from the prosecution to sentence Guo to a minimum of 60.5 years.

Guo’s trial attorney, Thomas M. Dickey, argued the sentence being requested by the government would essentially be for life.

Kagarise during the sentencing hearing stated he would not impose a 60.5-year minimum.

He said he took into consideration several mitigating factors in imposing the lesser sentence, including Guo’s young age, the fact that he had no criminal history, his intelligence and his acceptance of responsibility for his crimes.

During the hearing, Guo shed tears and stated, “All I ask for is forgiveness.”

However, he was stunned by the 23.5-year minimum imposed by the Blair judge and shortly after his sentencing, he appealed his sentence and Kagarise’s decision to classify him as a sexually violent predator under Pennsylvania’s Sexual Offender and Registration Act.

The SVP classification is based on findings by Pennsylvania’s Sexual Offender Assessment Board that Guo is attracted to young teens and that he is at a high risk to reoffend.

Judge Kagarise received the assessment from a member of the board, William Allenbaugh.

The defendant, through his appeals attorney, Kelvin L. Morris of Pittsburgh, in their presentation to a three-judge Superior Court panel, contended Guo entered pleas to 33 charges without fully realizing he could receive a sentence under which he would spend “almost the rest of his life in prison.”

The defense’s argument in its appeal was that Guo’s pleas of guilty were “involuntary and unknowing.”

Both Pennsylvania and federal laws indicate that the judge, before sentencing, must be sure the defendant understands the charges and the possible sentences he could face on those charges.

To determine if a defendant is “knowing” when he pleads, a judge has the defendant fill out a form addressing his knowledge of the process, and then, in open court, he conducts an oral colloquy.

Guo, in a petition after being sentenced, asked to withdraw his guilty pleas.

In defending his sentence, Kagarise stated in his opinion of the case that “the on the record colloquy and other evidence of record is sufficient to serve as a basis for denial of (Guo’s) request to withdraw his guilty plea.”

He continued by stating, “this court believes that the motion to withdraw the guilty plea herein is simply raised as a result of (Guo’s) lack of satisfaction with this court’s sentence.”

The opinion issued Thursday by the Superior Court stated, “the record supports (the Kagarise) analysis.”

The defense also challenged the constitutionality of Pennsylvania’s Sexually Violent Predator classification.

The classification violates Guo’s “right to reputation,” a right guaranteed by the Pennsylvania Constitution, the defense argued.

The appeals court opinion issued by Judges Jack A. Panella, Megan King and John T. Bender pointed out the constitutionality of the SVP designation was upheld by the Superior Court in a 2021 case and by the state Supreme Court this year.

In 2021, the Superior Court explained that the SVP classification is applied after a detailed assessment by a state board and a hearing before the trial judge.

The SVP classification is designed to protect society “from those who have been found to be dangerously mentally ill, and the designation does not violate the state constitutional right to reputation.”

The Supreme Court in its opinion this year upheld the classification, noting sexual offenders pose a high risk to reoffend.

The Supreme Court cited as evidence that sexual offenders reoffend at a rate three times higher than individuals convicted of non-sexual offenses.

The appeals court dismissed Guo’s request to grant him a new sentence and to nullify Pennsylvania’s registration laws.

Guo was charged with committing sexual offenses against a 15-year-old and three 13-year-old girls.

His crimes not only involved sexual exploitation, including the rape of a underage victim who was lured to his apartment in Juniata and sexually assaulting two 13-year-olds in a motel, but also drug-related offenses and operating a prostitution business at a local motel.

His offenses included counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, corruption of minors, dissemination of explicit sexual material to a minor, indecent and aggravated indecent assault, criminal use of a communication facility, solicitation to commit prostitution, statutory sexual assault, possession with intent to deliver drugs and driving during suspension.

Guo can request a Supreme Court review of his legal issues.