The Pennsylvania Superior Court this week rejected a constitutional challenge to the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act filed by a former Altoona Area High School special education teacher.

Holly Dawn Metzler, 51, of Martinsburg was arrested in January 2019 for sending nude photos and a video of herself to a 17-year-old male student.

Metzler ended up entering no-contest pleas to dissemination of sexually explicit material to a minor, corruption of a minor, and having unlawful contact with a minor.

Former Blair County President Judge Elizabeth A. Doyle last August placed Metzler on five years probation.

However the nature of her offenses required that she also register her address and other information with state police for publication on State’s Megan’s Law website for a period of 25 years.

At the time of her sentencing, Blair County defense attorney Daniel J. Kiss indicated that Metzler would be challenging the registration requirement.

The registration requirements to sex offenders in Pennsylvania have become tougher due to the passage in 2012 of the Sexual Offender Registration and Notification Act.

The Act, which requires registration up to life for some offenders, has become controversial and has faced repeated court challenges.

The law and its registration requirements have been in a state of flux, but so far has withstood the many attacks.

Metzler in her defense argued that a revised version of the law now in effect, is unconstitutional under Article1, Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.

That section of the Constitution outlines the rights to which a person is entitled — the enjoyment of life and liberty, of acquiring and possessing property and reputation, and of pursuing happiness.

Metzler, the Superior Court outlined, contended the registration requirements inflict cruel and unusual punishment on a person and violate recent constitutional law handed down by the Supreme Court, which requires a jury, as opposed to a judge, to determine facts of a case that can lead to an enhanced sentence.

Pennsylvania’s courts have been struggling with the state’s registration laws, attempting to determine if they represent added punishment imposed on defendants who commit sexual offenses, or if they represent a “non-punitive purpose of informing and protecting the public” from sex offenders.

The Superior Court panel reviewing Metzler’s challenge to SORNA’s registration requirements reviewed the defense contention that in her case they are unconstitutional.

She, for instance, had no prior criminal record, the defense emphasized.

Metzler received a probationary sentence, an indication that she “was not deemed to pose any significant future risk,” according to the defense.

And, it was argued the 25 years of registration will continue to have an impact on her life and reputation far beyond her period of probation.

The registration requirement “is greater than any sentence which could be imposed for her conviction,” stated the defense.

The judges hearing the case, Judith F. Olson, Megan King and Timika Lane, explained that SORNA’s registration requirements are rooted in what they explained as a “presumption” that convicted sex offenders pose a high risk of committing additional sexual offenses.

Referring to a major precedential case, Commonwealth v. Torsilieri, before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 2020, the Superior Court panel noted that even defense experts agreed that adult sexual offenders reoffend at a rate three times higher than individuals convicted of nonsexual offenses.

This is the argument that “validates the statutory underpinnings” of the SORNA registration requirements, the panel pointed out.

The panel then noted that the Metzler defense did not seek a hearing at which the constitutionality issue could have been submitted to Doyle.

The three-judge panel then explained, “Thus, on the record before us, Metzler’s constitutional challenges must fail because they cannot meet her heavy burden … to rebut the General Assembly’s stated non-punitive purpose of informing and protecting the public.”

Attorney Kiss said he filed the appeal to protect Metzler’s rights as long as the Torsilieri case was pending before the Supreme Court.

The state’s highest court, however, recently found the SORNA requirements to be constitutional and his appeal rested on the results of that Supreme Court decision, Kiss explained.

When it comes to SORNA, however, the issue that had not been challenged is the underlying presumption that sex offenders are much more likely to reoffend.

That may be the major question concerning SORNA, Kiss explained Wednesday.