Reply To: Pennsylvania Legislature attempts to “fix” unconstitutional law

#28870
Avatar
R

Changes meant to comply with “muniz”, hmmmm! Left out the part of the fact that it was based and won on the ex post facto clause. Not only is ex post a violation, I also believe it falls under the double jeopardy rule.i don’t see how they can apply any changes to construe the decision pre 2012, due to ex post facto. If that’s the case then the ex post facto clause should be non existent, hope I made some sense of my input.