In Commonwealth v. Cotto, 562 Pa. 32, 753 A.2d 217 (2000), the provisions of Act 33 were upheld against a constitutional challenge brought by a petitioner whose offense date brought him within the applicability of the provisions and, thus, afforded him the standing that Petitioner here lacks. Cotto's delinquency occurred on April 23, 1996, which came within the effective date of the 1995 amendments (120 days from November 17, 1995). In Cotto, the petitioner maintained, as does the Petitioner in the present action, that Act 33 was unconstitutional in that it was vague and improperly placed the burden on the juvenile seeking transfer from adult to juvenile court. Thus, bound by the ruling in Cotto, the Court concluded that the first amended petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.