A man criminally charged for recording a child custody hearing and posting it on Facebook cannot escape his 11-and-a-half-to-23-month prison sentence.

The three-judge Pennsylvania Superior Court panel consisting of Judge John T. Bender and Senior Judges John L. Musmanno and Correale F. Stevens upheld the sentence against Patrick Cline in a Dec. 29 order. Cline was convicted of violating the state Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act.

Cline challenged the sufficiency of the evidence that he knew recording and posting the video online was illegal, citing his testimony that he didn't know he wasn't allowed to record the closed-door hearing. Cline argued that the “no cellphone” signs in the courtroom said nothing about filming and that he did not consider the proceedings to be confidential.

“Critically in this regard, appellant fails to advance any argument that the custody conference did not involve protected 'oral communications' for purposes of the Wiretap Act,” Stevens wrote in the court's opinion. “Instead, he argues only that it was the commonwealth's burden to prove he knew the Wiretap Act proscribed the conduct in which he engaged, and absent such proof, his misunderstanding of the Wiretap Act's scope could serve as a viable defense.”

However, Stevens said it could not.

“The prosecution of the Wiretap Act charge against appellant turned, instead, on proof that appellant knowingly or intentionally intercepted and disclosed discussions that qualified as 'oral communications' under the statute,” Stevens said in a published opinion. “That is, the commonwealth was required to prove appellant knowingly or intentionally committed the acts proscribed under the statute; it was not required to prove appellant knew the law proscribed such acts, as a defendant's knowledge of the law is not an element of the offense. For this reason, we reject appellant's sufficiency challenge as articulated.”

Cline also contended that the prosecution violated his due process rights, but Stevens said Cline failed to raise that issue with the trial court first.

“The law is clear that 'issues, even those of constitutional dimension, are waived if not raised in the trial court. A new and different theory of relief may not be successfully advanced for the first time on appeal,'” Stevens said citing the 2009 Superior Court ruling in Commonwealth v. Santiago.

Cline is represented by Allentown attorney Robert Long, who could not be reached for comment. The case was prosecuted by the Lehigh County District Attorney's Office.