Jerry Sandusky’s attorneys have filed court documents outlining the reasoning behind Sandusky’s appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
The statement, filed in Centre County Court Monday, lists seven claims, including the argument defense lawyers made at Sandusky’s appeal in January: that the defense did not have enough time to prepare for trial.
In January, Sandusky’s lawyer, Joe Amendola, testified that even with more time to prepare, he would not have done anything differently during Sandusky’s trial in June. Judge John Cleland, who presided over the trial, denied the initial appeal.
Now, Sandusky’s attorneys are taking the case to a higher court because they believe the court ‘erred’ and Sandusky is owed a new trial.
Sandusky’s attorneys said in the statement the court “abused its discretion and violated due process of law as guaranteed by the fifth amendment by interfering with the defendant’s sixth amendment right to counsel when it denied defense motions for a continuance based on its inability to integrate the vast amount of material turned over by the prosecution to the defense when trial was imminent, which resulted in the lack of time to prepare and utilize such material to forward a defense or defenses to the charges.”
Counsel also states the court committed ‘reversible error’ when it refused defense requests to give the jury instructions and when it “required the jury to weigh the testimony of the defendant’s character witnesses against all of the other evidence in the case.”
The prosecution’s ‘adverse comment’ made about Sandusky not testifying, as stated by the defense, is also a point counsel considers to have been in error.
Attorneys for Sandusky filed a notice of appeal with the Superior Court of Pa. in February.
Sandusky, 69, is serving a 30-60 years for sexually abusing children. He’s being held at SCI Greene, a maximum-security prison about three hours away from State College.
