|
|
|
| Sex Offender Registration |
|
United States v. Madera,
No. 6:06-cr-202-Orl-18KRS (M.D. Fla., January 16, 2007): Sex Offender Registration: This is the first case I have come across that deals with facial attacks on the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 and the sub-part Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) which creates a national sex offender registry. In this case, Madera was convicted of a sex offense in New York and then moved to Florida where he failed to register. He was subsequently indicted in federal court. The federal district court denied Madera's motion to dismiss, upholding the Act over challenges based upon 1) the non-delegation doctrine (the Act allows the Attorney General to decide whether it should apply retroactively); 2) the Ex Post Facto Clause; 3) procedural and substantive Due Process under the Fifth Amendment; and 4) the Commerce Clause.
|
|
|
Doe v. Schwarzenegger,
No. S-06-2521 (E.D. Cal., February 9, 2007): Sex Offender Registration: A federal District Court holds California's "Jessica's Law" which prohibits sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of a public or private school or park, and also requires GPS monitoring for parole, is prospective only.
|
|
|
United States v. Smith,
No. 06-20674 (E.D. Mich., March 8, 2007): Sex Offender Registration: Judge Paul D. Borman recognized that other courts have rejected ex post facto attacks on the Adam Walsh Act that make it a crime to travel in interstate commerce and knowingly fail to register; however, he applied the plain language of the statute which uses the word "travels" in interstate commerce to mean present and future tense and thus not applicable to such travels that occurred prior to the implementation of the law on July 27, 2006. The motion to dismiss is GRANTED.
|
|
|
United States v. Gill,
No. 2:06-CR-00725-PGC (C.D. Utah, October 15, 2007): Sex Offender Registration: District Court order granting a motion to dismiss in a Failure to Register case on the grounds that Gill failed to register before the Attorney General had promulgated Interim Rules making the Act's criminal provision applicable to persons convicted before its effective date.
|
|
|
Mann v. Georgia Dept. of Corrections,
No. S07A1043 (Ga., November 21, 2007): Sex Offender Registration: Interesting case where the Court held that Georgia's regulatory scheme governing sex offenders violated the "takings" clause of the Constitution with regard to his residence, but not as to his business. As to his residence, he bought his home when it complied with the sex offender regulations, but a daycare moved close to his home which resulted in a violation. The Court held that this "regulatory taking" of his property was done without just and adequate compensation. However, his half-interest in a restaurant was a different story and the Court was not persuaded that it was too onerous under the facts.
|
|
|
State v. Robert Carl Bennett,
No. S-2007-885 (Okl.Cr., April 29, 2008) (unpublished): Sex Offender Registration: This is an intriguing opinion in a State appeal in which Special Judge Carlos J. Chappelle in Tulsa County dismissed a case at preliminary hearing in which Bennett was charged with Failure to Register as a Sex Offender. Although the opinion does not supply any details, Bennett apparently raised a defense of "homelessness" at preliminary hearing and the court found merit to such a defense. Judge Dana Kuehn affirmed the decision of Judge Chappelle and the Court of Criminal Appeals found no abuse of discretion by a 5-0 vote.
|
|
Question Submitted by: Director Justin Jones, Oklahoma Department of Corrections,
2008 OK AG 20 (July 29, 2008): Sex Offender Registration: This is an instructive Attorney General opinion dealing with the question of when a conviction from a foreign jurisdiction "counts" under Oklahoma law. Although the answer is nuanced, it appears that the AG directed the DOC to look at the facts of the foreign conviction.
|
|
|
State v. Robert Carl Bennett
No. S-2007-885 (Okl.Cr., April 29, 2008) (unpublished): Sex Offender Registration: This is an intriguing opinion in a State appeal in which Special Judge Carlos J. Chappelle in Tulsa County dismissed a case at preliminary hearing in which Bennett was charged with Failure to Register as a Sex Offender. Although the opinion does not supply any details, Bennett apparently raised a defense of "homelessness" at preliminary hearing and the court found merit to such a defense. Judge Dana Kuehn affirmed the decision of Judge Chappelle and the Court of Criminal Appeals found no abuse of discretion by a 5-0 vote
|
|
|
|
