A Mill Hall man sentenced in Huntingdon County to a minimum prison term of 14 months for driving under the influence of a controlled substance has lost his appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court.

But his case, as the Superior Court pointed out, reflected the multiple problems that arose within the county court systems during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Joseph N. Moyer, Jr., 36, was arrested for DUI and possession of drug paraphernalia on Sept. 25, 2019.

His trial was delayed when the Huntingdon County Court in March 2020 continued all jury trials due to the pandemic.

By July 2020, the county was ready to select juries, but, as the Superior Court reported in an opinion last Friday, due to the constantly changing COVID-19 infection rates, public gathering restrictions and infection-control guidance at the time, “The court’s multiple attempts to schedule and conduct jury trials during the summer of 2020 were thwarted.”

Jury selection for Moyer was finally scheduled for Sept. 15, 2020, but on Sept. 11, 2020, Moyer’s attorney, Douglas Keating of Blair County, sought a continuance.

Keating’s fax, however, did not arrive until after hours, and Judge George N. Zanic was not aware of it until the morning of jury selection.

Rather than delay jury selection, Zanic appointed Huntingdon County attorney Nicolas E. Newfield for the purpose of jury selection.

Newfield made a “general objection” to the process but did not ask for a continuance.

On Oct. 5, the day of trial, Keating, the Superior Court stated, put Moyer’s objections to the selection of a jury without him being present on the record but did not seek a continuance.

Moyer, who also was not available for the trial, was then tried and convicted in absentia.

Zanic eventually sentenced Moyer to 14 to 48 months in a state correctional institution.

Moyer appealed.

The Superior Court panel has now dismissed the appeal.

It pointed out that while the defense contended a continuance of jury selection was requested, there was nothing in the court record to show there was ever a fax.

The Superior Court then addressed Moyer’s complaint that the jury was selected without him present.

It again pointed out that the record was not clear.

It recognized that while Newfield made a “general objection” to the process, “He did not give the trial court any legal basis for the objection.”

Finally, Moyer claimed that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to continue his jury trial, but the appeals court opinion pointed out, “He does not offer a legal theory or any analysis to support that assertion.”

The court dismissed that issue as being waived.

It then affirmed Moyer’s conviction and sentence.

Moyer has already served his time in prison, and, according to state court records, was released on parole in February.

Keating said he will inform Moyer that he has a right to appeal the Superior Court decision.

Keating said he sought a continuance of Moyer’s jury selection because he was scheduled for a jury trial in Blair County at the same time.

And on the day of Moyer’s trial, Moyer indicated that he was stuck in traffic and asked for a delay to the start of his trial, Keating said.

The judge ordered the trial to continue without Moyer present.

“He (Moyer) never showed up for the trial,” Keating explained.