A U.S. Magistrate Judge has recommended that Jerry Sandusky’s latest appeal be dismissed without prejudice — meaning he can refile the appeal — because a resentencing order issued last May by the Pennsylvania Superior Court has not yet been completed.

The Superior Court issued an opinion in the Sandusky case on May 13.

Sandusky, a former Penn State football assistant coach, was sentenced to a prison term of 30 to 60 years for the sexual abuse of young boys, but in an appeal filed with the state Superior Court, he sought a retrial due to alleged new evidence uncovered after his trial had been completed.

The Superior Court dismissed his request for a new trial and upheld his long prison term, but the appeals court questioned the imposition of a portion of the sentence, which ordered Sandusky to pay $95,047 in restitution.

The appeals court panel that heard the case upheld a restitution amount of $1,706 for one of the victims in the Sandusky case, noting the money was reimbursement for counseling the victim had received.

There was no explanation, however, for the $95,047 restitution included in the sentencing order.

“Ultimately, there is no evident casual connection in the certified record between the $95,047 in apparent restitution and (Sandusky’s) convictions,” according to the ruling by a three-member Superior Court panel.

The panel vacated that portion of his sentence, ordering the trial judge to “address any outstanding issues related to the … restitution discussed above.”

Sandusky, through Williamsport attorney Edward J. Rymsza, last week filed a new appeal seeking to overturn the verdicts returned by a Centre County jury almost a decade ago.

The appeal was assigned to U.S. District Judge Malachy E. Mannion.

The judge referred the appeal to U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito and the magistrate on Thursday pointed out Sandusky’s most recent sentence was vacated.

He reported Sandusky “is currently in custody awaiting resentencing.”

Technically, Sandusky “is not yet in custody of a state court judgment of sentence,” the magistrate judge reported.

He concluded, “In other words, Sandusky’s petition is premature and must be dismissed without prejudice.”

Both sides have 14 days to respond to the recommendation prior to a ruling by the district judge.

Sandusky on June 22, 2012, was convicted on 45 counts stemming from his sexual abuse of youing boys.

He was initially sentenced to a term of 30 to 60 years on Oct. 9, 2012.

The Superior Court sent the case back to Centre County for resentencing because it included mandatory sentences that in 2013 were declared unconstitutional by the U.S.Supreme Court.

Sandusky was sentenced a second time on Nov. 22, 2019.

The judge again sentenced him to 30 to 60 years behind bars.

Sandusky once more appealed.

That led to the May 13, 2021, Superior Court decision to remand the case for resentencing yet again.

In his latest appeal, the defense raises many of the issues that have been subject to review during his initial appearances before the Pennsylvania appeals courts, including:

— The ineffectiveness of his trial counsel.

— Improper remarks to the jury by the chief prosecutor.

— The promise made to the jury by his attorney that he would take the stand in his own defense, followed by a later decision by his attorney that he not take the witness stand.

— The alleged inconsistent statements by the victims, and the massive publicity surrounding the case.

The thrust of the new petition is that Sandusky, due to the cumulative effect of all of the circumstances surrounding the case, did not receive a fair trial.

The petition concludes, “If the court believes, however, that no individual claim requires relief, the court must consider the cumulative prejudicial effect of the errors.”

Sandusky, 78, is presently serving his sentence in the State Correctional Institution at Laurel Highlands in Somerset County.