Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court

terry brunson

@ Chuck –

I Filed my amendment and I filed a new complaint –

The preliminary objection is clear. 42 Pa. C.S 9799.41 This is clear. SHALL EXPIRE

1 Pa. C.S. 1971(a) says that expired statues are replaced.

When Former Megan’s Laws were expired that brought all the requirements to an end. They were satifiied and complete. I hope you can see that.

So what Former Megan’s Law can be used to hold people to 42 Pa. C.S. chapter 97 subchapter “I” if they all were expired and an expired law is a completed law.

on 12-20-12 Sorna expired all former Megan’s Laws. When MUNIZ killed SORNA -1 The PSP could not revert back to former Megan’s laws they were expired. So the Pa Assembly came up with SORNA-2 However to be under SORNA-2 subchapter “I” there must be a forma Megan’s Law in the mix somewhere.

If All the former Megan’s Laws are expired – how can ACT 10 subchapter “I” come into play for pre-SORNA people ?

It would be impossible. You cannot challenge a law that was expired. It is a dead law. ACT 10 is not argued that way though. ACT 10 is raise as ex post facto – Civil in nature – No punishment in it. But not of those are near the real issue. It takes a former Megan’s Law to have been committed after April 1996 and before 2012 December. If those laws were Expired – how can ACT 10 survive the needing of a former Megan’s law violation, that was expired?

Do I even make sense? That is my challenge to ACT 10. It is now before the court in a new complaint.