MO- 3 sex offenders face charges from new Halloween law

Now starts the fun, Missouri enacted this Halloween law, and provided NO METHOD of notifying registered offenders of the requirements of the law. ALL sex offender laws MANDATE that the State notify the registrant BEFORE prosecuting them for violating such laws. So sayeth the U.S. Supreme court.

UPDATED 11-8-08: Interesting revelation by a commenter, one of those charged resides in his parent's home (a guest so to speak), and as such has no authority over the homeowners (his parents). Yet he was arrested for violating the restrictions law, his defense is he cannot possibly comply (defense of impossibility [see "Compulsion of an Impossibility" and SSRN "Can Impossibility Be a Defense in Attempt to Commit Crime?"). The same circumstances would occur when offenders live in apartment complexes. Obviously lawmakers -in this law- used -sounds good- rather than actually researching circumstances, before enacting this disaster. The law as applied to one of the three,is clearly unconstitutional under his circumstances, and others I can think of. Hopefully such registrants will sue the state for their losses and damage to their standing in the community.

11-8-2008 Missouri:

Three Cape Girardeau County residents have a court date Dec. 8 on charges they violated Missouri's new law restricting the Halloween activities of convicted sex offenders.

On Friday, Prosecuting Attorney Morley Swingle announced that Terry R. Greable, 30, Armando C. Torres, 59, and Sammy L. Sweaney, 40, were being charged with misdemeanors for failing to post a sign announcing "No candy or treats at this residence." In addition, Sweaney was charged with a second count for failing to leave all outside lighting off during the Halloween evening.

The case is the first to be filed under a law that took effect Aug. 28. In addition to requiring the sign and setting restrictions on lighting, the law also requires convicted sex offenders to remain inside their residence from 5 to 10:30 p.m. on Halloween and to refrain from all "Halloween-related activity with children."

The law was challenged in federal court prior to Halloween. The defendants included a Cape Girardeau woman, and they initially won a partial victory that parts of the law were unconstitutionally vague. The lower court ruling was reversed by the U.S. 8th District Court of Appeals.

-Note: The lower court ruling was not reversed, the lower court Injunction was reversed, the case was not heard and decided on the merits. That will be done sometime in the future.

Cape Girardeau County sheriff's deputies visited the homes of 13 of Cape Girardeau's approximately 85 registered sex offenders on Halloween night, said Lt. David James. The checks, which he called a "random sample," was conducted because checking all offenders would have been too time consuming, he said.

According to sworn statement included with the charges, Greable, of 504 N. Hope St. in Jackson, told deputy Heather VanGennip that no sign was posted at his residence because it is his parents' home and he planned to stay upstairs while they handed out candy. According to the statement, Greable has a 1996 conviction for child molestation.

VanGennip wrote in the sworn statement accompanying the charges against Sweaney, 1500 N. Spanish St., that when she visited his home, there was no sign, the porch light was on and he did not answer the door. According to the sworn statement, Sweaney was convicted of sexual assault in 2004.

And when VanGennip, who was accompanied by deputy Matthew Proffer, visited the home of Torres, she found no sign and a porch light burning while three men were on the porch. The men stated Torres was not home, VanGennip wrote in her sworn statement in his case. According to the statement, Torres was convicted for sexual misconduct in 2005.

Summonses were issued for all three.

Swingle, who argued in favor of the law's constitutionality in federal court, said he was informed of but did not ask for the checks of offenders. He said he thought all sex offenders in the county would be visited.

"I am very much in favor of this law because the law was intended to limit the contact sex offenders have with other people's children," Swingle said.

In 2006, the Missouri Supreme Court limited the registration of sex offenders to those convicted after the registration law took effect in January 1995. The court ruled that Missouri's constitution forbids the passage of laws that are retrospective in their effect.

The three cases, if the men are convicted, could provide a basis for testing whether the new limitations are also applicable only to people who committed offenses since the law was passed, Swingle said.

"Those issues will be decided by a local judge and ultimately the Missouri Supreme Court," Swingle said. ..News Source.. by Rudi Keller, Southeast Missourian