Page 13 - PCPA Winter 2025 Bulletin Magazine

CHRIS BOYLE'S LEGAL UPDATE:
UNITED STATES V. RONK, 2025 U.S. DIST. LEXIS 214309
Chris Boyle's Legal Update
WINTER 2025 BULLETIN
By: Chris Boyle, Esq., Chris Boyle Law Enforcement Consulting, LLC
COMMENT: Well, this one didn’t turn out 100%
in favor of law enforcement, but it was well
done none the less. Officers decided, prior
to running a “To Catch a Predator” arrest,
that the arrest team would NOT question
the alleged pedophile scumbag. I’m sorry.
I meant to say “the accused.” The Court
finds that we came pretty close to our goal,
but that we set up a situation near the end
that was the “functional equivalent” of an
interrogation and so, Miranda was required.
(“The "functional equivalent" of interrogation
includes "any words or actions on the part
of the police...that the police should know
are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating
response from the suspect.") Just something
to keep in mind if you find yourself in a similar
situation. Nice work Kingston PD!
Christopher P. Boyle, Esq.
LT. CHRISTOPHER BOYLE #125 (RET.)
is a fifth-generation Police Officer and
attorney. He spent the first sixteen
years of his professional life with the
Philadelphia Police Department, retiring
as a Lieutenant. The next sixteen years
were spent training, consulting for, and
defending Police Officers and their
Departments as a Trial Attorney and Law
Enforcement Expert. In 2020, Chris formed
“Chris Boyle Law Enforcement Consulting,
LLC” to provide training, subject matter
expertise and consultation services to law
enforcement and the legal profession. He
is a nationally recognized law enforcement
expert, frequently called upon to deliver
seminars and other training on a variety of
topics. He is also a proud member of the
Pennsylvania Chiefs of Police Association
who can be reached at: ChrisBoyle125@
ChrisBoyleConsulting. com or (215) 919-
7879. The material in this law alert has
been prepared by Chris Boyle. It is solely
intended to provide information on recent
legal developments and is not intended to
provide legal advice for a specific situation
or to create an attorney-client relationship.
United States v. Ronk
MEMORANDUM
United States District Court for the
Middle District of Pennsylvania
October 30, 2025, Decided; October 30, 2025, Filed
No. 3:24cr193
Defendant Matthew Ronk stands accused of attempting to
knowingly persuade, induce, entice, or coerce a minor to
engage in illegal sexual activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. §
2422(b). Additionally, the government contends that Ronk
attempted to transfer sexually explicit material to that child
in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1470. Defendant also allegedly
crossed state lines with the intent to engage in illicit sexual
conduct with the minor. The government thus advances
that Ronk violated 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b).
Reporter
2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214309 *; 2025 LX 441361
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MATTHEW RONK,
Defendant
Opinion by: JULIA K. MUNLEY
OPINION
According to the indictment in this case, Ronk is required
by law to register as a sex offender due to a prior conviction.
Consequently, Ronk has also been charged with three
counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2260A, a separate federal
recidivism statute applicable to registered sex offenders.
Section 2260A provides for a mandatory 10-year prison
sentence to be imposed in addition to — and served
continued on next page
13