6-17-2009 Missouri:
Court rules 10 must join sex offender registry
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- The Missouri attorney general's office said Tuesday's ruling by the state Supreme Court means that all sex offenders in Missouri must register with the state, including those convicted before the registry was created more than a decade ago.
The state's highest court found that the registry, which began in 1995 and expanded in 2000 to include misdemeanor offenses, must include all offenders living in Missouri, Attorney General Chris Koster said.
.Judges determined that a federal law that requires all offenders to register in their home state applies in Missouri, instead of a state constitutional provision that prevented officials from forcing offenders to register if their crimes predated the registry.
The court has misinterpreted the Adam Walsh Act which has a specific exemption, that if a state would violate its own constitution then it does not have to comply with the Adam Walsh Act! Further, the Missouri Supreme court does not have jurisdiction to violate its own state constitution.
Adam Walsh Act: SEC. 125. FAILURE OF JURISDICTION TO COMPLY...
(b) State Constitutionality-
(1) IN GENERAL- When evaluating whether a jurisdiction has substantially implemented this title, the Attorney General shall consider whether the jurisdiction is unable to substantially implement this title because of a demonstrated inability to implement certain provisions that would place the jurisdiction in violation of its constitution, as determined by a ruling of the jurisdiction's highest court.
(2) EFFORTS- If the circumstances arise under paragraph (1), then the Attorney General and the jurisdiction shall make good faith efforts to accomplish substantial implementation of this title and to reconcile any conflicts between this title and the jurisdiction's constitution. In considering whether compliance with the requirements of this title would likely violate the jurisdiction's constitution or an interpretation thereof by the jurisdiction's highest court, the Attorney General shall consult with the chief executive and chief legal officer of the jurisdiction concerning the jurisdiction's interpretation of the jurisdiction's constitution and rulings thereon by the jurisdiction's highest court.
(3) ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES- If the jurisdiction is unable to substantially implement this title because of a limitation imposed by the jurisdiction's constitution, the Attorney General may determine that the jurisdiction is in compliance with this Act if the jurisdiction has made, or is in the process of implementing reasonable alternative procedures or accommodations, which are consistent with the purposes of this Act.
In its unanimous decision, Missouri's highest court ruled in a case involving 10 sex offenders who argued they shouldn't have to register because their offenses predated the creation of the sex offender list. The judges found that a 2006 federal law requires all sex offenders to register with their home states.
That federal law, called the Sexual Offenders Registration and Notification Act, isn't subject to restrictions in the Missouri Constitution, the Missouri court decided.
"Parents and communities deserve to know when sex offenders live nearby, no matter when the offender committed the offense," Koster said in a written statement.
A Kansas City attorney representing the unnamed sex offenders did not immediately return a call seeking comment Tuesday.
There are currently 7,321 people on the list, which is maintained by the Missouri State Highway Patrol.
The case stems from a lawsuit filed by 11 people in Jackson County seeking to avoid registering as sex offenders. A trial judge ruled that 10 of the 11 people didn't have to register because their offenses predated the state's sex offender list. The state appealed.
Eight of those offenders moved to Missouri after a conviction for a sex crime in another state or under military law. The other three were convicted of misdemeanors before 2000.
The Supreme Court did not consider the case of one person who pleaded guilty in 2002 in Missouri who lost at the trial court level.
In June 2006, the state Supreme Court decided that the registration requirement could only be applied to offenses dating back to 1995. That's because Missouri's constitution bars retrospective laws, which the court defined as laws that impose new duties or restrictions based on an offender's previous actions.
That ruling came about a month before the federal sex offender registration law and wasn't mentioned in Tuesday's four-page ruling. ..Source.. by Southeast Missorian
Court decision: Court Summary:
1 comment:
It is a 4 page opinion which reverses a previous opinion. It looks like the Court did not want to put too much down on paper -- because it knew that its reasoning was suspect.
Post a Comment