125407660_web1_TTL03XX18Farber1TONED

Rushton and Farber to co-chair United Way’s 2020 campaign

125404948_web1_Navient-Wilkes-Barre-2July2014

Court allows AG Shapiro’s case against Navient to move forward

A state appellate court upheld the probation sentence imposed by a Luzerne County judge who prohibited a sexual offender residing in Duryea from having unsupervised contact with children in his family.
				William Paul Drozginski, 50, of Park Avenue, appealed an order from Judge Joseph Sklarosky Jr., who denied a request to modify his probation sentence allowing him to have unsupervised contact with children known to him.
				Drozginski was arrested by the state police Bureau of Criminal Investigations on multiple counts of child pornography in November 2016.
				Drozginski pleaded guilty to 10 counts of possession of child pornography and seven counts of dissemination of children engaged in sex acts in September 2017.
				Sklarosky sentenced Drozginski to one to two years in jail and four years probation in December 2017, and required him to register his address with authorities for 15 years as a sexual offender.
				Under Drozginski&rsquo;s plea agreement, he agreed &ldquo;to have no unsupervised contact with minors and where minors frequent, such as schools, school zones, parks, pools and libraries,&rdquo; according to court records.
				After Drozginski was paroled in December 2018, he filed an appeal to modify his probation sentence claiming there were no accusations of physical abuse to children known to him. Drozginski also claimed the probation sentence has financially cost his family approximately $800 per month for child care since he is prohibited from having unsupervised contact.
				Sklarosky denied the motion in August 2019, following a hearing in which prosecutors argued Drozginski was charged with viewing child pornography with victims the same age as the children known to him, according to court records.
				In an eight page opinion issued Tuesday, a three-member panel of the Superior Court denied Drozginski&rsquo;s appeal upholding Sklarosky&rsquo;s denial to modify Drozginski&rsquo;s probation sentence.
				&ldquo;We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied (Drozginski&rsquo;s) motion to modify probation and that (Drozginski&rsquo;s) claim on appeal fails,&rdquo; the Superior Court opined.
				The appellate court found that the probation sentence imposed upon Drozginski is &ldquo;reasonably related to his rehabilitation and not unduly restrictive of his liberty.&rdquo;

Appeals court: Sexual offender prohibited from being alone with children