Appeal from Judgment of Sentence in the Court of Common Pleas of Fayette County, Criminal Division, Nos. 827, 827 3/6, 827 4/6, 827 5/6 of 1984.
Anne John, Uniontown, for appellant.
Ewing D. Newcomer, Assistant District Attorney, Uniontown, for Com., appellee.
Cirillo, President Judge, and Tamilia and Popovich, JJ.
[ 356 Pa. Super. Page 345]
This appeal follows appellant's conviction, in a non-jury trial, of corrupting the morals of a minor, indecent assault, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse and indecent exposure.
[ 356 Pa. Super. Page 346]
Under the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9718,*fn1 appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five to ten years. He was also ordered to pay prosecution costs, $25 to the Crime Victims Compensation Fund and a fine of $500.
The conduct which formed the basis of appellant's conviction involved sexual contact between a minor child, who resided with her mother, and appellant. The activity extended over a two-year period beginning when the child was six years old.
In November 1984, appellant, accompanied by the child's mother, met with a caseworker for Children and Youth Services. Appellant made various inculpatory statements to the caseworker concerning his conduct with the child. The caseworker subsequently contacted the Chief of Police of Luzerne Township, Fayette County, pursuant to the mandatory reporting provisions of the Child Protective Service Law (11 P.S. § 2204).*fn2 The police contacted appellant
[ 356 Pa. Super. Page 347]
and placed him under arrest. While in custody and after being given his Miranda warnings, appellant made inculpatory statements to the police.
Appellant initially filed pre-trial motions seeking to have the reporting provision (11 P.S. § 2204) of the Child Protective Services Act, 11 P.S. § 2201 et seq., declared unconstitutional and his statements suppressed. This motion was denied and appellant petitioned to have the matter certified for appeal. The petition was also denied and appellant was subsequently convicted. Following the denial of post-trial motions and sentencing, this appeal was filed wherein appellant seeks to again challenge the constitutionality of the Child Protective Services Law and also the mandatory sentencing provisions of 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9718.
Appellant contends the trial court erred in not granting his post-trial motions in arrest of the judgment or for a new trial. This is based on the assertion that the Children and Youth Service's caseworker violated his constitutional rights by not informing him prior to the making of his statements of his Miranda*fn3 rights or of her obligation to report suspected child abuse. He also maintains the statements made to the police were tainted by the illegality of the initial statements and should have been suppressed. Finally he argues that the mandatory sentencing provision of 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9718 is unconstitutional in that it inflicts cruel and unusual punishment while denying equal protection.
Our review of the briefs and the record in this case leads us to conclude that appellant's ...