If it is held that, under the circumstances of this case, a person can be added to the sex offender registry if a child is in the vicinity of the underlying crime, then there is no crime -where a child may be present- that cannot be added to the registry. Think about it...even a ticket for a seatbelt violation (if a child is in the car).
3-26-2009 Wisconsin:
From Sex Crimes Blog
There have been several news stories recently outlining the problem with state registries in that imprisonment of a minor is an offense justifying listing. That means an offender who robs a store with a minor present or someone who termporarily restricts movement of a minor during a fight might be a "sex offender" for registry purposes. Jessica Slavin, at the Marquette Faculty Blog, writes about a challenge in such a case in Wisconsin:
One of the criminal cases, State v. Smith, 2008AP1011, asks the court to determine whether the sex offender registration statute, Wisconsin Statute section 301.45, is unconstitutional in its application to a defendant whose crime, false imprisonment of a minor, concededly had no sexual component whatsoever. The Defendant Smith was convicted of falsely imprisoning a minor in connection with a drug crime. That conviction triggered application of the sex offender registration requirements in section 301.45. Smith did not register, and was charged with failing to register as required. He argues that the sex offender registration requirement violates his due process and equal protection rights because his crime had no sexual component.
It seems difficult for either challenge to succeed under federal law, but perhaps the Wisconsin constitution will offer relief.
No comments:
Post a Comment