Senate bill 1239

[Bobbylloyd]

I know the first degree misdemeanor and statutory max of 5 years in relation to PICS and LTCF application questions has been brought up several times on this forum.
I apologize for beating what I'm sure some of you may consider a dead horse.

But!
As this applies directly to a situation I may be facing, im looking for any positivity I can.
I'm also hoping I'm on to something here.

My question is, if i was charged with a 2nd offense dui (M1) in 2009, sentenced to 90 days-1 year max (served 90 days) BEFORE the passing of SB1239 in 2014...
Does that count for anything beneficial in my situation?
Is there a grandfather clause argument available in this case?

For anyone reading who is not sure of what exactly SB1239 is...
It eliminated a loophole where multiple dui offenses could be counted as 1 offense if they happened within a certain time frame.

That has nothing to do with me.

It also outlines penalties and statutes for gradings of DUI's, effectively increasing penalty's for repeat offenders.
To the best of my knowledge, this is when the statutory maximum sentence for a misdemeanor of the first degree dui became 5 years.

If I am incorrect, please don't insult me just correct me.

I answered the infamous question on the LTCF application TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
When I was given the 90 day sentence with a MAXIMUM of ONE YEAR, I thought that was that upon reading the application question.

Now, I'm not really worried about being charged with falsifying anything, because as soon as I started reading about this M1 prohibitor, I went into the sheriffs office and told them "I think I have made a pretty big mistake on my application."

I explained very thoroughly what I was referring to and why I was under the impression that I was answering truthfully.

I was told by a sergeant "as long as you haven't had 3 DUI's within a 5 year period, you're good."

I reminded him again about the M1 I was referring to, and why I was referring to it.
He pulled up the ujs portal entered my information, and said:
"Yes I see what you're talking about. I see the M1 here but, it doesn't matter you would still need to have gotten 3 within a 5 year period to be disqualified."

Now, of course, this man is human and could certainly be incorrect.
But, wouldn't you think a sergeant of the sheriffs department, who was in the office that handles LTCF applications, would be pretty damn sure of what he was talking about?
I hope so!

The main question here, is simply about the date of my charge in reference to SB1239.
It was 5 years before the bill passed.
when I was sentenced, was the maximum 5 years for a M1?
I'm not sure and trying to look this kind of stuff up is taking a crazy amount of time and gets kind of confusing.

If it wasn't, does that mean that my 2nd DUI is non prohibiting?

Or does this work in reverse?
Since the passing of that bill, even if it wasn't a max of 5 years back then, it doesn't matter because it could be now.

All of this is quite a head scratcher.
And if you ask me, a complete and total violation of the 2nd amendment.
That's probably a whole other rant though.

Please refrain from any criticism about DUI as well.

This happened 8 years ago and I've been totally sober since.
Going to jail saved my life and I consider it a prime example of corrections and rehabilitation being successful.

Thanks for reading and I hope some answers and insight come from this.

[eagleclaw]

If you have a M1 on your criminal history you are disqualified by federal law from buying or owning a firearm. I don’t know how that would have anything to do with SB 1239.

[Bobbylloyd]

I was asking if sentences given before the passing of sb1239 would still fall into the category of "exceeding one year".

Trying to find out when exactly a misdemeanor of the first degree got the statutory max of 5 years attached to it.

[knight0334]

If you have a M1 on your criminal history you are disqualified by federal law from buying or owning a firearm. I don’t know how that would have anything to do with SB 1239.

Not necessarily. The default M1 is 5 years, but not all M1's have a max of 5 years. Certain passages have other maxed sentences for a "M1". Before SB1239, or the earlier 2001-2003 law change, a DUI M1 had a max possible of 1 year because it had a specific grading under that era's DUI statutes, and you have to go by the grading/penalty of the offense relative to the laws in effect at the time.

[knight0334]

I was asking if sentences given before the passing of sb1239 would still fall into the category of "exceeding one year".

Trying to find out when exactly a misdemeanor of the first degree got the statutory max of 5 years attached to it.

"exceeding one year" actually means federal offenses or state felonies that exceed 1 year, or state misdemeanors that exceed 2 years.

[Bobbylloyd]

Knight, I hope you're right and, what you are saying does indeed make the most sense if the pre 1239 sentencing was a max of one year.

I'm having a really hard time finding out max sentences that are no longer in effect.
I know some people have been charged with "unsworn falsification" for attempting to purchase guns with an m1 on their record. Maybe looking up those cases would lead to a date on the persons offense.

The fact that the sergeant in the sheriffs office addressed my M1 and still said "you would need to have 3" should give me all the confidence I need but... I don't know.

Either way this is an insane situation to me.
It should go by the sentence actually given. Regardless of the grade of misdemeanor.

It's not domestic violence, there was no accident or injury, it had nothing to do with firearms, and it was 8 years ago!

The second amendment should NOT be that fragile.

[Bobbylloyd]

And I just found one....
A man was recently charged with falsifying and he was denied purchase because of a DUI in 2008.
That would be before sb1239.
This is confusing and appalling.

[knight0334]

I'd hold off until one of the resident lawyers chime in(hopefully).

I'm sure they have a copy of the old law in one of their books.

I do know that the DUI grading of an M1 changed over the course of time. ...whether it be from the early 2000's DUI law change, or the SB1239 enactment.

[SigForLife]

You need to contact competent counsel to obtain and review all of the documents filed in your criminal charging to determine what options you may have, although, the time for filing a non-nunc pro tunc Post-Conviction Relief Act petition has now expired - https://blog.princelaw.com/2015/06/2...m-certain-duis. Of course, there is a line of case law that an illegal sentence can always be challenged.

[knight0334]

It is starting to look like the penalty was changed on Feb 1, 2004 - which lowered the BAC from .1 to .08, then set gradings of BAC of General(.08-.099%), High(.1-.159%), and Highest(.16% and higher).

http://www.dmv.pa.gov/Information-Ce...gislation.aspx


Sounds like you may be prohibited.