FL- Public defender challenges Dade's sex offender laws

6-21-2008 Florida:

The Miami-Dade Public Defender's Office says a confluence of county and city rules has made it virtually impossible for sex offenders to find a home.

The Public Defender's Office is challenging the constitutionality of Miami-Dade's sex-offender residency ordinance, arguing it essentially banishes poor sex offenders from the county and, in some cases, leaves them homeless.

The office has offered up an unprecedented argument: that the county's ordinance, combined with numerous city ordinances, make it nearly impossible for sex offenders to find housing.

Supporters of the laws, however, insist that restrictions are necessary to protect children against convicted child rapists, molesters and other sexual predators.

The constitutional challenge comes as recent restrictions placed on sex offenders have come under fire around the nation. In South Florida, more than three dozen municipalities have passed ordinances that prohibit sex offenders from living within certain distances of places where children congregate, including parks and schools.

Many argue that the laws simply push sex offenders underground or, in some cases, under the Julia Tuttle Causeway in Miami-Dade, where a group of sex offenders has been camped out for more than a year because they have nowhere else to go.

Nine Miami-Dade County judges held a preliminary hearing on the issue this week, peppering both sides with questions about the local ordinances.

The county attorney urged the judges not to toss out the county ordinance.

''You're being asked to break some pretty new ground, to do something that's never been done before,'' assistant county attorney Thomas Logue said.

Legal experts say it's not clear whether the Public Defender's Office's tactic will work. Generally, legal challenges are mounted against a single law, viewed in a vacuum, not against the cumulative effect of various laws.

An Iowa law restricting where sex offenders could live was deemed constitutional because the federal courts ruled there were still places in the state open to them.

`BANISHMENT'?

Florida State University Law School professor Wayne Logan said the Miami-Dade public defender's argument that the patchwork of local ordinances essentially blankets the county is a novel one.

''The accumulated effects of the local and state ordinances may constitute banishment,'' he said.

Professor Corey Yung, of John Marshall Law School in Chicago, said South Florida's overlapping ordinances may be ripe for a challenge.

''No one I know has raised the overlapping issue, either successfully or unsuccessfully,'' he said. ``But Florida is one of the few states that has so many of these less-than-state-level residency restrictions.''

In Miami-Dade, 18 cities, and in Broward, 24 cities have passed residency restrictions for sex offenders. Most of the ordinances prohibit sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of a school or park. But some of the ordinances extend the buffer zone to as far as 3,000 feet.

Miami-Dade's ordinance uses the 2,500-foot zone, but specifically says that any city ordinance that is stricter should take precedence.

An expert hired by the Miami-Dade Public Defender's office found that there were only 880 available housing units in the county where sex offenders can legally live. Of that number, only 98 of those units rent for $1,200 or less.

There are more than 2,000 registered sex offenders in the county, and more than 1,300 fall under the county's residency restrictions.

Assistant Public Defender Valerie Jonas pointed to the sex offenders who have been camping under the Julia Tuttle Causeway as evidence of how the county's ordinance is unconstitutional.

''They're living under the causeway because they couldn't find any other place to be,'' she said, calling the conditions ``degrading, sordid, dangerous.''

Logue and victim advocates insist that blanket restrictions are necessary because of the high recidivism rates among sex offenders.

''You're being asked to declare as unconstitutional a popular ordinance that protects children, our most vulnerable population, from convicted sex offenders,'' he said. ``God forbid the ordinance is declared unconstitutional and a child gets molested.''

That's the type of argument that prompted residency ordinances in the first place. But law enforcement groups in Florida and around the country increasingly oppose the laws, arguing they're expensive to enforce and don't accomplish their goals. Instead, they push sex offenders underground, making them harder to track and potentially more dangerous, some experts say.

''It's become increasingly difficult to find places for sex offenders to live,'' said Gretl Plessinger, spokeswoman for the Florida Department of Corrections.

The majority of homeless sex offenders in the state are in South Florida, she said.

STATEWIDE LAW

Broward Public Defender Howard Finkelstein lobbied for a uniform law for the entire state. He fears the various ordinances in Broward are nearly impossible for his clients to abide by.

''They have no reason to follow the law because it's the law that has them with no place to live or work or way to start a new life for themselves,'' he said.

Thus far, efforts in the state Legislature to pass a statewide sex offender residency law that preempts all the local ordinances have failed.

The various local laws and ordinances still garner popular support.

''Do we want people who have been convicted of sexually deviant behavior to peer out of their bedroom windows out into a parking lot or playground where children congregate?'' asked Miami-Dade Homeless Trust Chairman Ron Book, whose daughter went public about her ordeal of being molested by a baby sitter.

After resolving some technical issues this week, the judges tentatively scheduled a trial on the issue for August, with Judge Edward Newman presiding, and Judges Sam Slom, Beth Bloom, Jose Fernandez, Mary Jo Francis, Maria Ortiz, Louis Krieger-Martin, Norma Lindsey, Antonio Arzola all attending.

The judges can issue a joint ruling, or can each rule only on cases in their courtrooms. Depending on how they rule, and whether either side appeals, the case has the potential to undo the county's sex offender ordinance. ..News Source.. by SUSANNAH A. NESMITH