blogs.phillyburbs.com : NJ high court considers sex offender ordinances.
NJ.com : Justices hear case on sex offenders; Housing restriction brings challenges.
New Jersey’s Supreme Court is considering whether two towns can restrict where convicted sex offenders can live after they’re released.
Cherry Hill and Galloway passed ordinances prohibiting sex offenders convicted of crimes against minors from living within 2,500 feet of schools, parks and playgrounds.
Those ordinances were struck down by a state appeals court last July. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Tuesday.
The high court’s ruling could affect dozens of similar laws that have been enacted in other New Jersey towns.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Judge Nixes Pittsburgh Sex Offender Limits
York Daily Record: Judge Nixes Pittsburgh-area Sex Offender Limits.
Pittsburgh—A federal judge has voided a county ordinance that would have restricted where registered sex offenders may live in the Pittsburgh area.
U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster's ruling, issued Friday and posted online Monday, says the ordinance conflicts with state laws meant to help rehabilitate sex offenders and reintegrate them into society.
Allegheny County Council passed the ordinance in October 2007 banning sex offenders from living within a half mile of schools, licensed child care facilities, community centers and public parks.
The American Civil Liberties Union says the ordinance amounted to after-the-fact punishment and that offenders will have virtually no place to live in the county.
The county hasn't said if it will appeal.
Pittsburgh—A federal judge has voided a county ordinance that would have restricted where registered sex offenders may live in the Pittsburgh area.
U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster's ruling, issued Friday and posted online Monday, says the ordinance conflicts with state laws meant to help rehabilitate sex offenders and reintegrate them into society.
Allegheny County Council passed the ordinance in October 2007 banning sex offenders from living within a half mile of schools, licensed child care facilities, community centers and public parks.
The American Civil Liberties Union says the ordinance amounted to after-the-fact punishment and that offenders will have virtually no place to live in the county.
The county hasn't said if it will appeal.
Sex Offender Challenges Bus Ban
BBC(UK) : Sex Offender Challenges Bus Ban.
A convicted sex offender is to mount a legal challenge to an order banning him from boarding buses that may be carrying children. He claims the order is a breach of his human rights.
He was released last year but swiftly rearrested after allegedly boarding two buses in Falkirk.
The case has been referred to the High Court in Edinburgh.
A Sexual Offences Prevention Order (granted to police) stopped him from leaving his home at night, approaching women, other than in his family, and boarding buses between 0800 and 0930 and between 1500 and 1700.
The court was also told that upon his release from jail, he was immediately placed under surveillance by police. Just weeks later, he was arrested after allegedly boarding a bus in Falkirk on 8 November and again in the town on 13 November.
His defence said the bus ban was contrary to article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the "right to respect for private and family life". He added: "They are draconian conditions that take them out of the realms of simply caution about conduct in the streets. "He is being prosecuted for acting in a normal manner. The court created criminal offences for Mr Bermingham.
"They then present it to him as he leaves prison and set up surveillance of him in the expectancy that he will fail."
"The issues raised are of considerably general importance and there is an issue as to whether the legislation is incompatible with convention rights."
A convicted sex offender is to mount a legal challenge to an order banning him from boarding buses that may be carrying children. He claims the order is a breach of his human rights.
He was released last year but swiftly rearrested after allegedly boarding two buses in Falkirk.
The case has been referred to the High Court in Edinburgh.
A Sexual Offences Prevention Order (granted to police) stopped him from leaving his home at night, approaching women, other than in his family, and boarding buses between 0800 and 0930 and between 1500 and 1700.
The court was also told that upon his release from jail, he was immediately placed under surveillance by police. Just weeks later, he was arrested after allegedly boarding a bus in Falkirk on 8 November and again in the town on 13 November.
His defence said the bus ban was contrary to article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the "right to respect for private and family life". He added: "They are draconian conditions that take them out of the realms of simply caution about conduct in the streets. "He is being prosecuted for acting in a normal manner. The court created criminal offences for Mr Bermingham.
"They then present it to him as he leaves prison and set up surveillance of him in the expectancy that he will fail."
"The issues raised are of considerably general importance and there is an issue as to whether the legislation is incompatible with convention rights."
The Lunsford Myth
“If you do my son like you do those predators, I will expose every case where you gave a "true" sex offender a lenient sentence."- Mark Lunsford To The Clark County Ohio Prosecutor's Office
This link provides some very disturbing information about Mark Lunsford, father of the little girl who was so brutally and wrongfully murdered in 2005, and for whom "Jessica's Laws" were enacted. While this man has been held up as a hero and victim as a result of this tragedy, there is a very dark side to this man's history which is detailed here:
http://www.operationawareness.com/whats_new_28.html
You will read of the facts involving his son, Joshua, who was arrested in2007 without public fanfare, for two felony sex offenses involving a 14 year old girl, whereupon he was allowed to plead to a single misdemeanor with no sex offender registration. His son then allegedly violated his probation twice and the public records were taken off the Clark County, Ohio web site.
You will also read of the police finding of child pornography images on Mr. Lunsford's computer cache during the investigation of his missing daughter.
News Article here (PDF)
http://www.operationawareness.com/lunsford_paradox.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/03/couey-trial.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/06/state-attorney-says-computer-records.html
During the March 10th hearing of the U.S. Congressional subcommittee on the Judiciary, Mr. Lunsford was dragged out of the trailer once again to give his clumsy verbal testimony:
Mark Lunsford stated on the record that he felt that it was "okay" if some people were put on the sex offender registry, even if they didn’t belong there, that it was a “small sacrifice” to make …”IF it saves just one child.”
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/05/brother-of-jessica-lunsford-faces-sex.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/06/looks-like-mark-lunsfords-other-son.html
This link provides some very disturbing information about Mark Lunsford, father of the little girl who was so brutally and wrongfully murdered in 2005, and for whom "Jessica's Laws" were enacted. While this man has been held up as a hero and victim as a result of this tragedy, there is a very dark side to this man's history which is detailed here:
http://www.operationawareness.com/whats_new_28.html
You will read of the facts involving his son, Joshua, who was arrested in2007 without public fanfare, for two felony sex offenses involving a 14 year old girl, whereupon he was allowed to plead to a single misdemeanor with no sex offender registration. His son then allegedly violated his probation twice and the public records were taken off the Clark County, Ohio web site.
You will also read of the police finding of child pornography images on Mr. Lunsford's computer cache during the investigation of his missing daughter.
News Article here (PDF)
http://www.operationawareness.com/lunsford_paradox.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/03/couey-trial.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/06/state-attorney-says-computer-records.html
During the March 10th hearing of the U.S. Congressional subcommittee on the Judiciary, Mr. Lunsford was dragged out of the trailer once again to give his clumsy verbal testimony:
Mark Lunsford stated on the record that he felt that it was "okay" if some people were put on the sex offender registry, even if they didn’t belong there, that it was a “small sacrifice” to make …”IF it saves just one child.”
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/05/brother-of-jessica-lunsford-faces-sex.html
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/06/looks-like-mark-lunsfords-other-son.html
GA May Reform Sex Offender Law
wsbtv.com : Georgia May Soften Sex Offender Law.
ATLANTA -- Three years after adopting one of the nation's stiffest stances on sex offenders, Georgia lawmakers are rethinking some of the crackdown's toughest provisions. After complaints from civil rights groups and round after round of costly court challenges, powerful Georgia lawmakers are looking to soften some of the very parts of the law that incited the greatest debate.
Changes to the 2006 law could allow some offenders to petition the legal system to get off the registry, allow others to volunteer at churches and clear the way for disabled and elderly offenders to be exempt of the strict residency requirements.
The revisions, which already have cleared the Senate, are aimed at addressing some of the most vocal critics who challenged the rules in court. They have won the support of sheriff's groups, defense attorneys and some of the sex offenders who so vocally criticized them.
"I think they start to create a rational law that can move in the direction of creating public safety," said Kelly Piercy, who was convicted of child pornography charges in 1999. "They are actually bringing this legislation back to its noble intent."
But the most stirring of changes still could face a backlash from the House lawmakers who supported the measure three years ago as a way to protect Georgia's children from the state's 16,000 sex offenders.
The law, which supporters say is among the nation's toughest, was passed in 2006 at the urging of Republican leaders who vowed it would prevent the state from becoming a "safe haven" for Georgia's sex offenders.
Shortly after it took effect, civil rights groups challenged a provision that banned offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of just about anywhere children gather. They claimed it rendered vast areas of Georgia off-limits to offenders. They also have targeted other portions of the law, with at least eight challenges that have been resolved or are pending in state and federal court.
One change would allow "low risk offenders," such as those convicted of statutory rape, to petition the courts to get off the registry after completing their sentence. The law has been criticized by judges for treating the most egregious offenders, such as child molesters, the same as those convicted for having consensual sex with an underage partner.
It also would clear the way for most sex offenders to volunteer in churches. Sex offenders who are elderly and disabled could ask the courts to be released from the residency requirements under the proposal. Both those issues are at the center of federal lawsuits. And it would allow the homeless to identify the place they sleep using a street address or other description after the Georgia Supreme Court ruled last year the law fails to tell homeless offenders how they can comply.
Another section would clarify parts of the measure that have put people convicted of kidnapping or falsely imprisoning a minor during other crimes on the sex offender registry. Instead, they would only be put on the registry if their crimes involved a sex offense.
A key portion also would address privacy advocates concerned about a requirement that sex offenders hand over their Internet passwords. Under the proposal, offenders would keep their passwords but still hand over their e-mail addresses and user names.
The proposal has earned the support of sheriff's groups, who say is crucial to help their deputies enforce the existing laws.
ATLANTA -- Three years after adopting one of the nation's stiffest stances on sex offenders, Georgia lawmakers are rethinking some of the crackdown's toughest provisions. After complaints from civil rights groups and round after round of costly court challenges, powerful Georgia lawmakers are looking to soften some of the very parts of the law that incited the greatest debate.
Changes to the 2006 law could allow some offenders to petition the legal system to get off the registry, allow others to volunteer at churches and clear the way for disabled and elderly offenders to be exempt of the strict residency requirements.
The revisions, which already have cleared the Senate, are aimed at addressing some of the most vocal critics who challenged the rules in court. They have won the support of sheriff's groups, defense attorneys and some of the sex offenders who so vocally criticized them.
"I think they start to create a rational law that can move in the direction of creating public safety," said Kelly Piercy, who was convicted of child pornography charges in 1999. "They are actually bringing this legislation back to its noble intent."
But the most stirring of changes still could face a backlash from the House lawmakers who supported the measure three years ago as a way to protect Georgia's children from the state's 16,000 sex offenders.
The law, which supporters say is among the nation's toughest, was passed in 2006 at the urging of Republican leaders who vowed it would prevent the state from becoming a "safe haven" for Georgia's sex offenders.
Shortly after it took effect, civil rights groups challenged a provision that banned offenders from living, working or loitering within 1,000 feet of just about anywhere children gather. They claimed it rendered vast areas of Georgia off-limits to offenders. They also have targeted other portions of the law, with at least eight challenges that have been resolved or are pending in state and federal court.
One change would allow "low risk offenders," such as those convicted of statutory rape, to petition the courts to get off the registry after completing their sentence. The law has been criticized by judges for treating the most egregious offenders, such as child molesters, the same as those convicted for having consensual sex with an underage partner.
It also would clear the way for most sex offenders to volunteer in churches. Sex offenders who are elderly and disabled could ask the courts to be released from the residency requirements under the proposal. Both those issues are at the center of federal lawsuits. And it would allow the homeless to identify the place they sleep using a street address or other description after the Georgia Supreme Court ruled last year the law fails to tell homeless offenders how they can comply.
Another section would clarify parts of the measure that have put people convicted of kidnapping or falsely imprisoning a minor during other crimes on the sex offender registry. Instead, they would only be put on the registry if their crimes involved a sex offense.
A key portion also would address privacy advocates concerned about a requirement that sex offenders hand over their Internet passwords. Under the proposal, offenders would keep their passwords but still hand over their e-mail addresses and user names.
The proposal has earned the support of sheriff's groups, who say is crucial to help their deputies enforce the existing laws.
Friday, March 20, 2009
U.S. Senators : Extend Sex Offender Law Deadline
Thecrimereport.org : Key Hill Leaders: Extend Sex Offender Law Deadline.
Key Congressional leaders have asked Attorney General Eric Holder to extend by one year the July deadline for states to comply with the 2006 federal sex offender registry law, part of the Adam Walsh Act. No state has been judge in compliance with the law so far and 14 states have been granted extensions. States that fail to follow the law could lose federal anticrime aid. The extension request was made by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX).
The lawmakers said that, “Despite significant efforts by many state legislatures, state and other jurisdictional agencies, there have been unforeseen difficulties in implementing the law and significant added costs, which are now even more burdensome in these difficult economic times.” Some states have resisted complying with the federal law because it could conflict with provisions of their own laws on sex offenders.
Key Congressional leaders have asked Attorney General Eric Holder to extend by one year the July deadline for states to comply with the 2006 federal sex offender registry law, part of the Adam Walsh Act. No state has been judge in compliance with the law so far and 14 states have been granted extensions. States that fail to follow the law could lose federal anticrime aid. The extension request was made by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA), House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX).
The lawmakers said that, “Despite significant efforts by many state legislatures, state and other jurisdictional agencies, there have been unforeseen difficulties in implementing the law and significant added costs, which are now even more burdensome in these difficult economic times.” Some states have resisted complying with the federal law because it could conflict with provisions of their own laws on sex offenders.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
MO Supreme Court Ruling on Sex Offender Registry
Seattle Times : Mo. court rules date of conviction, not offense, decides who must sign state sex offender list.
Jefferson City, Mo. —The Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified which sex offenders must be included in the state registry.
Starting in 1995, sex offenders have been required to have their names included in a state database. But the state high court has ruled that those whose only offense happened before 1995 cannot be forced to register because the continuous registration requirement did not exist when the sex offense occurred.
The state Supreme Court in a 7-0 opinion ruled the sex offender registration requirements applied to Holden because the trigger is the conviction and not the date of the actual offense.
That clarified previous rulings on the sex offender registry, which had created some confusion over whether the focus should be on the date of the guilty plea or conviction or on the date of the offense.
Judge William Ray Price, writing for the court, noted that the sex offender registration requirement had been in place for several months when Holden pleaded guilty.
"So long as the plea or conviction occurs after the effective date of the statute, as in this case, the registration requirements are not retrospective in operation, regardless of the date the underlying offense was committed," Price wrote.
"If the purpose of the registration requirements is to permit the authorities and the public to stay apprised of an offenders' residence, then it may prove unwise to impose harsh punishments on those offenders, like Mr. Holden, who undertake good faith but technically erroneous efforts at compliance," wrote Teitelman, who was joined by Judge Michael Wolff.
State of Missouri vs. William D. Holden, SC89635
Courts: http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=12086&dist=Opinions (search case number SC89635; decision posted here.
Jefferson City, Mo. —The Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday clarified which sex offenders must be included in the state registry.
Starting in 1995, sex offenders have been required to have their names included in a state database. But the state high court has ruled that those whose only offense happened before 1995 cannot be forced to register because the continuous registration requirement did not exist when the sex offense occurred.
The state Supreme Court in a 7-0 opinion ruled the sex offender registration requirements applied to Holden because the trigger is the conviction and not the date of the actual offense.
That clarified previous rulings on the sex offender registry, which had created some confusion over whether the focus should be on the date of the guilty plea or conviction or on the date of the offense.
Judge William Ray Price, writing for the court, noted that the sex offender registration requirement had been in place for several months when Holden pleaded guilty.
"So long as the plea or conviction occurs after the effective date of the statute, as in this case, the registration requirements are not retrospective in operation, regardless of the date the underlying offense was committed," Price wrote.
"If the purpose of the registration requirements is to permit the authorities and the public to stay apprised of an offenders' residence, then it may prove unwise to impose harsh punishments on those offenders, like Mr. Holden, who undertake good faith but technically erroneous efforts at compliance," wrote Teitelman, who was joined by Judge Michael Wolff.
State of Missouri vs. William D. Holden, SC89635
Courts: http://www.courts.mo.gov/page.asp?id=12086&dist=Opinions (search case number SC89635; decision posted here.
First Obama Judicial Appointment?
Sentencing.typepad.com : Here comes the Obama judges.
According to this New York Times article, "President Obama is expected to name his first candidate to an appeals court seat this week." Interestingly, the headline for this Times report is "Moderate Is Said to Be Pick for Court," and here are a few more particulars:
President Obama is expected to name ... David F. Hamilton, a highly regarded federal trial court judge from Indiana, for the appeals court in Chicago....Judge Hamilton, who is said by lawyers to represent some of his state’s traditionally moderate strain, served as counsel to Senator Evan Bayh when Mr. Bayh was the state’s governor; he is also a nephew of former Representative Lee H. Hamilton of Indiana. A senior administration official said Judge Hamilton would have the support of both Mr. Bayh, a Democrat, and the state’s other senator, Richard G. Lugar, a Republican.
The Times article notes a recent sex offender sentencing ruling by Judge Hamilton that likely will get (too much?) attention given the modern affinity for partisan judicial confirmation battles:
In 2008, Judge Hamilton struck down as unconstitutional an amendment to the state law requiring convicted sex offenders to provide the authorities with personal information, including any e-mail addresses or user names. The amendment would also have required the offenders to agree to allow their home computers to be searched at any time and to pay for a program to allow monitoring of their Internet use.
The judge said the amendment cut into the heart of a person’s right to privacy in his home. “The ability of the individual to retreat into his home and therefore to be free from unreasonable intrusion by the government stands at the very core” of constitutional protections against unreasonable searches, he said.
I reported and linked to this ruling by Judge Hamilton in this post, where I speculated that this 52-page(!) ruling "might make its way to the Seventh Circuit and perhaps further." I do not know if Judge Hamilton's ruling has been appealed, though I suspect we will hear a lot more about this case if Judge Hamilton is soon tapped to move up to the Seventh Circuit.
Sex Offenders and the 10% Solution
In the Zone: Sex Offenders and the Ten-Percent Solutions
Asmara Tekle-Johnson
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Abstract:
At first glance, sex-offender residency restrictions appear plausible because they ostensibly place a convicted sex offender's residence out of reach of children. However, these regimes address less than ten percent of the very real problem of child sex abuse, as family members and acquaintances of children commit more than ninety percent of this abuse. On the other hand, many schemes effectively banish almost 100% of convicted sex offenders to society's literal and social margins, condemning many low-risk offenders to a lifetime of isolation while breeding optimal conditions for high-risk offenders to reoffend. The practical implications of this policy choice, therefore, are dangerous and real, lulling the public into a false sense of security.
This Article challenges prevailing judicial orthodoxy that many sex-offender residency restrictions are constitutional under the Ex Post Facto Clause. The Article applies the analytical framework of Smith v. Doe, the U.S. Supreme Court's most recent case involving sex-offender legislation. It also forges a new way of thinking about these regimes as land-use policies that "negatively" zone individuals out of the urban cores. The Article proposes an innovative "positive" zoning scheme, the Sex-Offender Containment Zone, which zones high-risk convicted sex offenders back into the city in a manner that is effective, humane, and constitutional.
Asmara Tekle-Johnson
Thurgood Marshall School of Law
Abstract:
At first glance, sex-offender residency restrictions appear plausible because they ostensibly place a convicted sex offender's residence out of reach of children. However, these regimes address less than ten percent of the very real problem of child sex abuse, as family members and acquaintances of children commit more than ninety percent of this abuse. On the other hand, many schemes effectively banish almost 100% of convicted sex offenders to society's literal and social margins, condemning many low-risk offenders to a lifetime of isolation while breeding optimal conditions for high-risk offenders to reoffend. The practical implications of this policy choice, therefore, are dangerous and real, lulling the public into a false sense of security.
This Article challenges prevailing judicial orthodoxy that many sex-offender residency restrictions are constitutional under the Ex Post Facto Clause. The Article applies the analytical framework of Smith v. Doe, the U.S. Supreme Court's most recent case involving sex-offender legislation. It also forges a new way of thinking about these regimes as land-use policies that "negatively" zone individuals out of the urban cores. The Article proposes an innovative "positive" zoning scheme, the Sex-Offender Containment Zone, which zones high-risk convicted sex offenders back into the city in a manner that is effective, humane, and constitutional.
Sex Offenders Banned From Bars
4029tv.com Arkansas : Convicted Sex Offender Is Arrested For Going Inside Local Bar.
FORT SMITH, Ark. -- Fort Smith police launched an under cover investigation when witnesses told them a level four sex offender was inside the J.A.T. bar near Garrison Avenue. Undercover officers went inside the bar on two separate occasions. A police report states they saw Johnny Spence working on sound equipment inside the bar, which is owned by his wife.
Police said Spence is not allowed to be inside a facility that serves alcohol since he is a convicted sex offender.
FORT SMITH, Ark. -- Fort Smith police launched an under cover investigation when witnesses told them a level four sex offender was inside the J.A.T. bar near Garrison Avenue. Undercover officers went inside the bar on two separate occasions. A police report states they saw Johnny Spence working on sound equipment inside the bar, which is owned by his wife.
Police said Spence is not allowed to be inside a facility that serves alcohol since he is a convicted sex offender.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
