Reply To: AWA Loses in Pennsylvania’s Highest Court – Discussion Continued

terry brunson

I am still in the fight – the PAG is trying a time delay trick asking for extension of time to delay their brief. I made objection the court gave them the extension any way with instructions to ask for no more time extensions.

Case 339 MD 2018 is the core case that the PASC kings Bench is watching close. The 339 MD 2018 case has a 3 judge panel on the case to make sure they get the decision on ACT 10 and ACT 29 right.

The PASC is watching under Kings Bench 122 MM 2018 if the Commonwealth court makes one wrong order the jurisdiction will change. It is up to me to apply for jurisdiction change if I feel I am being treated unfairly by the court in case 339 MD 2018.

So far the Commonwealth court is doing the right things in case 339 MD 2018. The PAG is stalling for time to file a simple reply brief in opposition to my brief.

My position is simple. It it it under matters of conclusions of Law no facts to present at all.

42 Pa. C.S. 9799.41 says all former Megan’s Laws expired 12-20-12, and ACT 10 and ACT 29 call for all people with a former Megan’s law offense after April 1996 before December 2012 to register with the PSP.

If you have an expired former Megan’s Law how can it be used to be applied under ACT 10 and ACT 29? Expired Law cannot be revived back to life to be used- You would have to do another offense.

1 Pa. C.S. 1971(a) in the construction Act that says that it is not possible to Amend SORNA to make ACT 10 or ACT 29 to amend it to call for former expired law to come back to life. They look at it as a re write of Megan’s Law 2.

Commonwealth v. Derhammer 11-22-17 shut that down by deciding at the PASC that Megan’s Law 2 is Expired and Megan’s Law 3 was made unconstitutional by Commonwealth Neiman. The PSP has no room to call Pre-SORNA people to comply with ACT 10 or ACT 29 from their former Megan’s Law offense. SORNA 9799.41 means what it says – – – – EXPIRED __——-___
expired law cannot be used in ACT 10 or ACT 29.

1 Pa. C.S. 1922(1) provides that Pa. legislature did not intend an ABSURD result to have ACT 10 and ACT 29 apply in statutory scheme as expired law to be applied to amended law.

42 Pa. 9799.41 means what is says as good law of SORNA – expired former Megan’s Law is expired and cannot be applied in ACT 10 or ACT 29 [.]

1 Pa. C.S. 1928(b)(1) gives express definition to old expired Megan’s Law expired in provision as 42 Pa. C.S. 9795.1 and 9795.2 no longer exist to be applied. The Pa. Assembly just cannot re write the law and unexpire expired law.

If they knew that wanted to use former Megan’s Law provision they should have repealed SORNA and made a savings clause. They did not do that they expired the old Megan’s Laws out of greed for compliance money from The Fed AWA pressure. Former Megan’s Laws 1 2 3 are not AWA compliant. they cannot be recalled to life. can i GET AN amen. The PASC is the only court that put ACT 10 and ACT 29 to death. The Commonwealth court has to fight through 9799.23 B)(2) which says the court shall have no authority to relieve a sexual offender from the duty to register under this subchapter or to modify the requirements of this subchapter as they relate to the sexual offender.

This is BS and against our right to suit in court. the Pa. Constitution says in Article 1 Section 11 says All courts shall be open; and every man for an injury done him in his lands, goods, person or reputation shall have remedy by due course of law, and eight and justice administered without sale, denial or delay. Suits may be brought against the Commonwealth in such manner, in such courts and in such cases as the Legislature may by law direct.

The PAG and PSP are running out of steam – they are going to need the Pa Assembly soon to re write SORNA to some how recapture a former Megan’s Law offender some other way than ACT 10 and ACT 29. Watch. it is coming.

I just need my day in court to slam ACT 10 and ACT 29 off all of us.