ilies of the deceased, and now everything is turned upside down on its head, Sanguedolce said. These people had to go through not only the loss of a loved one, but the tragic facts and circumstances surrounding it. Issue at hand The issue arose from a March ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that held the state's statutory life-without-parole sentence for second-degree murder is unconstitutional. Under state law, a person commits second-degree murder whenever someone is killed during the commission of six felonies - rape, robbery, arson, burglary, kidnapping or involuntary deviate sexual intercourse - regardless of whether the defendant personally committed the killing or intended for anyone to die. As a result, any supporting players to those felony crimes - such as getaway drivers - faced life sentences even if they did not have foreknowledge that a murder would take place. The Supreme Court opinion, authored by Chief Justice Debra Todd, held that such a compulsory punishment was inconsistent with the protections bestowed upon our citizens under the cruel punishments' clause of the state Constitution. In issuing the opinion, the court imposed a 120-day stay of its order invalidating the mandatory sentence to give the Legislature time to consider remedial measures. In June, state Sen. Lisa Baker, R-20, Lehman Twp., introduced a bill that would amend the statute to authorize a sentence of 35 years to life for second-degree murder. The legislation would offer the courts leeway, allowing judges to deliver less than 35 years for defendants who were not directly involved in the killings, as well as to impose life without parole in cases where a jury finds the defendant caused the victim's death along with an aggravating factor. Within days, the Senate approved the legislation in a 30-20 bipartisan vote. The region's other senators - David Argall, R-29, Rush Twp.; Rosemary Brown, R-40, Middle Smithfield Twp.; Lynda Schlegel Culver, R-27, Shamokin Dam; and Marty Flynn, D-22, Dunmore - joined Baker in supporting the bill. However, the state House of Representatives did not take up her proposal. Instead, the body passed another bill sponsored by Rep. Napoleon J. Nelson, D-154, Montgomery, that would do away with the mandatory life sentence for second-degree murder, instead calling for the development of sentencing guidelines to be considered by judges when determining the appropriate sentence for the crime. The bill does not establish a mandatory minimum sentence and would make those serving life for second-degree murder eligible for parole after 30 years. The proposal would also give judges the discretion to release prisoners who have serious or life-threatening illnesses. The bill cleared the House in a mostly party-line 102-100 vote on July 23, with nearly all Democrats supporting the legislation and nearly all Republicans opposing. Reps. Frank Burns, D-72, Cambria, and Thomas Mehaffie, R-106, Dauphin, were the only two members to break party ranks. At the time, the Pennsylvania Legislative Black Caucus, which Nelson chairs, issued a statement saying members were seeking to creating a fair justice system that is rooted in the belief that rehabilitation strengthens public safety. Justice is not measured solely by the length of a sentence, the group said. It is measured by whether our laws are constitutional, equitable and effective. We can support victims, protect our communities, and still recognize that accountability, rehabilitation and redemption are not mutually exclusive; they are essential components of a justice system worthy of public trust. The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Tim Briggs, D-149, Montgomery, also issued a statement saying he supported the House bill, which would replace the mandatory life sentence with a term that considers an offender's specific role and level of culpability. This legislation provides a responsible path forward by ensuring that sentences are based on an individual's level of culpability while maintaining safeguards to protect our communities, Briggs said. House Republicans in turn alleged Democrats were opening the door for more than 1,100 convicted felony murderers to seek resentencing and release. The House majority intentionally chose not to correct the unconstitutional sentencing statute before the deadline, Rep. Craig Williams, R-160, Chester and Delaware, said in a statement. As a result, the mandatory sentencing structure for felony murder has collapsed under the weight of the Supreme Court's decision and our failure to act timely. More than 1,100 inmates serving life sentences without the possibility of parole will petition courts for resentencing and possible release. Even if the house bill advances, they have removed all mandatory sentences for felony murderers, meaning these heinous villains could receive no prison time. Resolution needed In a statement last week, Baker said resolving the issue remains a top priority for her and many other members of the Senate. It is extremely disappointing that the House of Representatives put politics ahead of the interests of criminal justice and any consideration of the families of murder victims, she said. Describing her bill as a solid and sensible measure that would comply with the Supreme Court ruling, Baker said the proposal would also maintain the spirit of the plea bargains victims' families accepted. She blasted House Democratic leadership for what she described as a gravely troubling lack of outreach to her fellow Senate Republicans. The product the House put forward is unacceptable, Baker said. Adding medical release is a misplaced priority. Until we can bridge the difference on the process for dealing with convicted, second degree murderers, there is zero appetite for working on a process for expanding medical parole, especially to cop killers and other first-degree murderers. Sanguedolce echoed Baker's concerns about the medical release provisions in the House bill and questioned whether they could be abused, similar to a healthy person gaming the system to get a medical marijuana card. Is this the same thing? Sanguedolce asked. Because this is a little more serious to me. He noted that none of the murder victims got a second chance at life, and said their families should not have to spend the rest of their lives worrying about if or when their killers will get out of prison. Life should be life. It shouldn't be, for these victims, life except if you meet any of these 100 circumstances, Sanguedolce said. There's just no closure for them that way. Preparing for appeals On Thursday, the Pittsburgh-based Abolitionist Law Center announced it had filed rare King's Bench petitions on behalf of four lifers from elsewhere in Pennsylvania asking the state Supreme Court to make its March decision retroactive, opening the door for the defendants to seek amended sentences. Five Luzerne County defendants are serving life in prison for second-degree murder: Kerekes, 52, Preston Bonnett, 35, Breon Judon, 33, Louisa Reyes, 22, and Michael Simonson, 49. Court records indicate none has yet filed a challenge in response to the recent Supreme Court ruling. However, prosecutors across the state are bracing for a deluge of appeals over the issue. Sanguedolce noted that prosecutors as well as public defenders will potentially have to spend time reviewing all those cases, tracking down witnesses and retaining experts to testify at hundreds of re-sentencing hearings. That's kind of a huge burden on county taxpayers, Sanguedolce said. You can't really determine justice on a checkbook, but we've already been through all that. It's supposed to be final at some point. Families like Bartusek's are now learning that is not necessarily the case. She described the situation as extremely frustrating and expressed concern about having to forever worry about whether Kerekes will one day make parole. I don't find it fair, because I think cases that have already had the victims agree upon a certain plea deal should not be affected by this, Bartusek said. Nobody is considering the victim in these cases, and that's what's scary to me.