The Pennsylvania Superior Court on Monday rejected an appeal filed by a former Bedford County man who is serving a sentence of 137 to 307 years in prison for the sexual abuse of three young children.

Greg Alan Gibbs Sr., 48, of Clearville, was convicted by a jury on Dec. 16, 2009, of six counts of rape of a child, five counts of aggravated indecent assault and three counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse of a child, endangering welfare of children and corruption of minors.

Gibbs presently is incarcerated in the State Correctional Institution in Forest County.

But since his lengthy sentence was imposed, he has filed three post-conviction petitions with the Superior Court.

In the first petition, he claimed his trial counsel was ineffective for not seeking a plea agreement.

The appeals court ruled that he had no constitutional right to expect the prosecution to offer him a plea agreement.

He also charged that his attorney did not explain to him that he could receive what amounted to a life sentence if convicted of the offenses.

Those arguments were rejected by the appeals court after his attorney testified he never sought a plea agreement because Gibbs adamantly maintained his innocence.

The Superior Court opinion stated also, “the Commonwealth is never under any legal obligation to plea bargain with any defendant.”

In his second post-conviction petition, Gibbs claimed the primary witness who testified against him — his ex-wife, Tammany Sue Gibbs — gave false testimony as well as hearsay testimony during the preliminary hearing in his case, and the evidence was insufficient to bind the case over for trial.

That petition was rejected because it was untimely.

Post-conviction petitions must be filed within a year of the official closing of the case.

The most recent appeal was filed on Jan. 25, 2023, and although it, too, was untimely, Gibbs, serving as his own attorney, raised an exception to the one-year rule.

He argued that upon a review of a transcript of his trial, he was able to pinpoint 35 alleged lies that his ex-wife told during her testimony.

He claimed the prosecution was aware of these falsehoods.

But, he insisted, he did not realize the extent of the false testimony until he obtained a copy of the trial transcript in 2022.

Thus, he argued, his most recent petition revealed “newly discovered evidence” that serves as an exception under the timeliness rule.

During a subsequent hearing, he was asked, “Since you were at the trial, why did it take you until you got the trial transcripts to discover that you were convicted by perjured testimony or by a lie?”

He replied that during the trial, he did not understand the law or the legal system, and it wasn’t until he went to jail that he started learning the law.

Upon receiving a transcript of the trial, that’s when he discovered the alleged lies, Gibbs proclaimed.

The judge presiding over the post-trial hearing, Edward E. Guido of Cumberland County, rejected Gibbs’ argument.

He found the transcript did not reveal any new fact “because (Gibbs) was present during the trial, and heard his ex-wife testify.”

The judge ruled his petition was untimely.

Superior Court Judges Judith F. Olson, Mary P. Murray and Jill Beck stated in their Monday opinion, “Our review discloses that (Judge Guido’s) findings are supported by the record, and its legal conclusions are sound.”

The panel stated, “The trial transcript upon which (Gibbs) relies is, at best, a newly discovered source for previously known facts.”

The appeals court judges concluded, “our independent review of the record discloses no meritorious, non-frivolous issues (Gibbs) could have raised.”

Gibbs initially had an attorney representing him in the case, but the attorney asked to withdraw from the case.

The appeals court permitted the attorney to withdraw.