Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

terry brunson

@ Cary
I don’t think they put the brief in whole. I filed for summary relief under Pa. R.A.P. Rule 1532(b) because I know the discovery on PSP classification of me as a tier 3 is not provable by evidence.

The court allows summary relief when the respondent has no substantive proofs of why they classified me other than the statue say so.

They put me on SORNA without a hearing. I asked for one many times, Then the PA assembly expired Megan’s Law 3 and replaced it with SORNA. Now they want to revert people back to Megan’s Law 3 rules. . . . BUT the only thing. Megan’s Law 3 is gone. . . . . . You just cannot bring back expired Laws. You can if you repeal a law. But Megan’s Law 3 was not repealed. . . a savings clause could be used to revert back to it -BUT not was done.

I hit HB 1952 in the third amended brief. . .Pages 7, 8 and 9.
I point out that to put me under this I have to have an offense after it becomes law. They think that they can apply HB 1952 on pre- SORNA people by taking all the punitive stuff out and applying it then. The PASC use to accept that. Since Muniz not any more. The Ex Post Facto issue is the date not the punitive elements.

Muniz did bring up punitive factors but that was not what made the law ex post Facto. it was the retroactive element by the date. and in SORNA it added more punishments than what Muniz had agreed to accept under Megan’s Law 3.

Since Megan’s law 3 is gone. There is no revert back. The Pa. legislature knew this so they made a whole new law called HB 1952 and fast tracked it to a vote of 188 -0 It is slotted to be vote by the Pa. Senate soon and then to Governor to become law. It will make there BUT it will not make it in practice as law against the people it was made to attack. only people who offense is after 22 April 1996 and before Dec 21, 2012. That is only one group. Pre- SORNA people. That is in violation of Pa. constitution Article 1 Section 26, and 17